Seems odd that this has to be done, but for now there are (unknown) size limits on the qa-assets repo. Also, a larger size means that cloning and iterating over the files takes a longer time.
Not sure how to measure the net impact of this, but with some backups reverting this commit, it can be limited on the downside?
The following sections might be updated with supplementary metadata relevant to reviewers and maintainers.
For detailed information about the code coverage, see the test coverage report.
See the guideline for information on the review process.
| Type | Reviewers |
|---|---|
| ACK | dergoegge |
If your review is incorrectly listed, please react with 👎 to this comment and the bot will ignore it on the next update.
ACK faa190b1efbdfdb9b12a7bfa7f732b5471a02e64
In the long run we should find a more scalable solution than a git repo for our corpora and re-enable this.
Not sure how to measure the net impact of this, but with some backups reverting this commit, it can be limited on the downside?
I think oss-fuzz maintains an internal corpus that includes the use_value_profile feature inputs, so the downside (in terms of not finding bugs) should be pretty minimal.
