From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.0 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,NICE_REPLY_A, SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id E8BDC1F4B4 for ; Wed, 20 Jan 2021 15:54:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S2390965AbhATPxa (ORCPT ); Wed, 20 Jan 2021 10:53:30 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:42506 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S2391155AbhATPvo (ORCPT ); Wed, 20 Jan 2021 10:51:44 -0500 Received: from mail-ot1-x32f.google.com (mail-ot1-x32f.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::32f]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 95C23C061575 for ; Wed, 20 Jan 2021 07:51:04 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-ot1-x32f.google.com with SMTP id f6so14561259ots.9 for ; Wed, 20 Jan 2021 07:51:04 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=RI71Uiz5xetXDKgugkLiqFABBHMbcXEn63sLM7atCt8=; b=GIBT1+Cis5DTfVJTTtHvtycMyncvaX4lPYnyI9qZMaa2MB3BCCYz6AXZjdJCMUfkS8 LC+dT+BqkvJidJXVeheXCmW3Duy2IWyFhHU4CGdFD776+OCpjqjuJ2SzgUcrx0Q6bJGb /G7HjBc3r9dmGVJwhUu1T4/I7im60KUAEvTENJQihXMY/ohXkR4/pFK7osvm/K1MZOju kOyVfOEhv/OUqbCiQcfrDZQR5hAs/bAOqmH97g+s4ByKOT42TuxkZeHc1Hbm/tPNdXRM 2yqJXwDU/Bnd/fwtGd/l0hk5/jJOfOWFvYDjXAAI8y6PnnU2QnvqkOExhLoeJfvlTKjt l0qg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=RI71Uiz5xetXDKgugkLiqFABBHMbcXEn63sLM7atCt8=; b=Xz0ARxaGQgOOuBjvkIlcmCGViAXs3jXQTH071UCZOc6D87bgbX79hIKXORo08ZWHdR zlGk2ij/oUzZHoY/lDm95w0cfwGdm9Hq/VqujFMCIWtMXC6DmmSuIwAu6mTNbaCD0ux0 +geA12Kv/I65dElezI1YRblsND4VdgjAYjYGJLo4q7WiR/ouBJTXJA2FpEUtllTbij6V YxMxGxUMhmE04UTLqPLQMabfONikJnRqy8U6plDbxDVcT4vWpRJJzDaWFMNQh5qCGeX4 R+JJ6KLsQl/IG5L6NObHQyd5KniF5MNznBqRUO+J3RGkF8aLfi5qBvDULWqWYzs/l1UN Y0Eg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533i51yh0NuMfMSNWZPuk4OiQpNelTR6BuQrnf7jCI623Pwhs6by lFn3/RjYZr/gAjxFNJ2pRw0= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJx7fWleIkmOCdNce9MrDMSPWvKq/ZTYim1aNG0IcSOlqp5IGeO3cKrgx1Jlr82RoCb1rgArXg== X-Received: by 2002:a9d:4e8f:: with SMTP id v15mr7178502otk.121.1611157863848; Wed, 20 Jan 2021 07:51:03 -0800 (PST) Received: from ?IPv6:2600:1700:e72:80a0:710c:cecb:a7d:75ab? ([2600:1700:e72:80a0:710c:cecb:a7d:75ab]) by smtp.gmail.com with UTF8SMTPSA id j11sm483780otl.18.2021.01.20.07.51.02 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 20 Jan 2021 07:51:03 -0800 (PST) Subject: Re: [PATCH 09/10] builtin/repack.c: extract loose object handling To: Taylor Blau Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, peff@peff.net, dstolee@microsoft.com References: <98c65017-8c22-a21f-0e86-a15d91bd7f70@gmail.com> From: Derrick Stolee Message-ID: Date: Wed, 20 Jan 2021 10:51:02 -0500 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:85.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/85.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On 1/20/2021 9:34 AM, Taylor Blau wrote: > On Wed, Jan 20, 2021 at 08:59:48AM -0500, Derrick Stolee wrote: >> On 1/19/2021 6:24 PM, Taylor Blau wrote: >>> 'git repack -g' will have to learn about unreachable loose objects that >> >> This reference to the '-g' option is one patch too early. Perhaps >> say >> >> An upcoming patch will introduce geometric repacking. This will >> require removing unreachable loose objects in a separate path >> from the existing checks. >> >> or similar? > > Mmm. I had imagined that this would be read either in the context of > this series, or by someone in the future long after 'git repack -g' had > been introduced. > > I could see that it's confusing, though, and I do agree your wording > makes clearer that the option doesn't exist yet. > > I'm happy to send a replacement or reroll if you feel strongly, but in > either case I'll wait for a little more review first. Definitely don't rush a re-roll for my nit-picks. Thanks, -Stolee