Re: [PATCH v2 13/20] merge-ort: step 1 of tree writing -- record basenames, modes, and oids

[Jonathan Tan <jonathantanmy@google.com>]

> On Wed, Nov 11, 2020 at 12:01 PM Jonathan Tan <jonathantanmy@google.com> wrote:
> >
> > > +struct directory_versions {
> > > +     struct string_list versions;
> >
> > Maybe comment that this is an unordered list of basenames to <whatever
> > the type of ci->merged.result is>.
> 
> There actually is an order, and it's important.  It's reverse
> lexicographic order of full pathnames (the ordering comes from the
> fact that process_entries() iterates paths in that order).  The
> reasons for that ordering are (1) all the basenames within a directory
> are adjacent so that I can write out a tree for a directory as soon as
> it is done, and (2) paths within a directory are listed before the
> directory itself so that I get the necessary info for subtrees before
> trying to write out their parent trees.
> 
> It's not until later patches that I take advantage of this ordering
> (and when I do I have a very long commit message to describe it all),
> but I can add a comment that this is a list of basenames to
> merge_info.

Ah, yes you're right. I'm not sure what I was thinking of.