mailing list mirror (one of many)
 help / Atom feed
From: Stefan Beller <>
To: Junio C Hamano <>
Cc: Jonathan Nieder <>, "" <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] submodule: use cheaper check for submodule pushes
Date: Thu, 13 Jul 2017 12:39:20 -0700
Message-ID: <> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <>

On Thu, Jul 13, 2017 at 11:37 AM, Junio C Hamano <> wrote:

> I think Jonathan's question (which I concurred) is if we also ended
> up relying on the side effect of calling that function (i.e. being
> able to now find objects that are not in our repository but in the
> submodule's object store).  By looking at the eb21c732d6, we can
> tell that the original didn't mean to and didn't add any code that
> relies on the ability to be able to read from the submodule object
> store.  I am not sure if that is still true after 5 years (i.e. is
> there any new code added in the meantime that made us depend on the
> ability to read from submodule object store?).

Yes we are safe, because the function itself only spawns a child process
(not using any of the objects).

It's only caller push_unpushed_submodules also doesn't rely on objects
loaded after calling push_submodule.

The caller of push_unpushed_submodules (transport.c, transport_push)
also doesn't need submodule objects loaded.

> My hunch (and hope) is that we are probably safe, but that is a lot
> weaker than "yes this is a good change we want to apply".

Given the above (I went through the code), all I can do is repeating
"yes this is a good change we want to apply".


  reply index

Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-07-12 23:45 Stefan Beller
2017-07-13  0:01 ` Jonathan Nieder
2017-07-13  0:09   ` Stefan Beller
2017-07-13  0:53   ` Junio C Hamano
2017-07-13  5:14     ` Stefan Beller
2017-07-13 18:37       ` Junio C Hamano
2017-07-13 19:39         ` Stefan Beller [this message]
2017-07-13 20:48           ` Jonathan Nieder
2017-07-13 20:54             ` Stefan Beller
2017-08-15 22:43               ` [PATCH] push: do not add submodule odb as an alternate when recursing on demand Stefan Beller
2017-08-15 23:10                 ` Jonathan Nieder
2017-08-15 23:14                 ` Jonathan Nieder
2017-08-15 23:27                   ` Stefan Beller
2017-08-15 23:23                 ` Junio C Hamano
2017-08-15 23:31                   ` Stefan Beller
2017-08-16  0:11                     ` Junio C Hamano
2017-08-16  1:05                       ` Stefan Beller
2017-08-16  2:08                         ` Jonathan Nieder
2017-08-16  5:52                           ` Stefan Beller
2017-08-16 16:35                         ` Heiko Voigt

Reply instructions:

You may reply publically to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:

  List information:

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to='' \ \ \ \ \

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link mailing list mirror (one of many)

Archives are clonable:
	git clone --mirror
	git clone --mirror http://ou63pmih66umazou.onion/git
	git clone --mirror http://czquwvybam4bgbro.onion/git
	git clone --mirror http://hjrcffqmbrq6wope.onion/git

Newsgroups are available over NNTP:

 note: .onion URLs require Tor:
       or Tor2web:

AGPL code for this site: git clone public-inbox