Hi,
On Tue, 29 Sept 2026 at 10:14, Ayush Tiwari <ayushtiwari.slg01@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 29 Sept 2026 at 07:30, Peter Smith <smithpb2250@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Attached is v2 with those changes. Thoughts?
> > >
> >
> > Hi Ayush.
> >
> > //////////
> > Patch v2-0001
> > //////////
> >
> > Patch 0001 looks good to me, but more eyes than mine need to review it.
>
> Thanks for the review!
>
> >
> > //////////
> > Patch v2-0002
> > //////////
> >
> > I confirmed the test fails when patch 0001 is not applied and passes
> > when it is applied.
> >
> > I assume the test code is AI-generated, because it looks way less
> > human-readable than a typical TAP test. If the test is ever intended
> > to be pushed, then it needs lots of comments to describe what it is
> > doing and expecting at each step.
>
> I do not intend this to be pushed since as I stated upthread its
> a niche case that came out of manual review rather than field report.
>
> I'll post a simplified version in some time for the same, thanks
> for looking into it.
Attached is v3, with simplified tests and 0001 remains the same.
Regards,
Ayush
