From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.2 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,RP_MATCHES_RCVD shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7E5AC1F744 for ; Wed, 13 Jul 2016 08:22:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752714AbcGMIVX (ORCPT ); Wed, 13 Jul 2016 04:21:23 -0400 Received: from mout.gmx.net ([212.227.15.19]:52574 "EHLO mout.gmx.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752713AbcGMIVM (ORCPT ); Wed, 13 Jul 2016 04:21:12 -0400 Received: from virtualbox ([37.24.141.253]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx003) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0MLfLH-1bNWWf1ngR-000qdJ; Wed, 13 Jul 2016 10:20:50 +0200 Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2016 10:20:43 +0200 (CEST) From: Johannes Schindelin X-X-Sender: virtualbox@virtualbox To: Duy Nguyen cc: Jeff King , Junio C Hamano , Josh Triplett , Git Mailing List Subject: Re: gc and repack ignore .git/*HEAD when checking reachability In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: <20160709140931.GA3185@x> <20160712152646.GF613@sigill.intra.peff.net> <20160712155141.GA5967@sigill.intra.peff.net> User-Agent: Alpine 2.20 (DEB 67 2015-01-07) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:uqHcn5NqE+8FTojokn72OyFt5MrmREVQ/aSJhSHLWe+pSNATu3i +z4iXijvxTzY/XBzU/YoJBwR2LYKJAxgmCcinqDj9J8CxK2k06TVEawrCwJMkG26TI68BV+ rQC/OEYKpBpPtC1eYUkKh6L6SB3xXWGBpJJtKc1CAAPNaeCJzWrfzQhJbSQcj3bfNFayFSK XAqZXROx75srOUOPW3J2g== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V01:K0:rd/UGh19nnE=:xbb4j/VBqOvOvjm4VreDUR u8p2Q4pdnuDl2A/r/lJRyKu8J7OpDL1ugAWsH1Oq7jzcNOt/cKPLzXBpR5+XahBBTOvhYT2xW GLRmvBevSexd4+7S+PG+I7t+/X/DU0o5rqNUP7DW7XyzO+h4JX9XavzNzvXtZUhSlibCcRm+v IeoSUgjiLxC7bxSCphGScahOUtS3jwVUGerPbFTCgk0sp1ambvHgUYyne+LEycNZB8l7FZUjq RArO3uXyRmm6Kkpz7mUs0kC7aG+T8mKsOOsX+IzvbmIsP/kjkCa+vIe6yLPzpO+r4m5omNwgC qw9JTphQLopwNFBa8EhCumesXQZIOSgPmtO7uIsDTtKxTti2Tu8uiPkJdACtdtGP0jXgqIWzh ic9bLSB78Nv4IEi6krAEuSRBHTEjs4dzqncCjmW9ztDRuxg2c6C0reKbG4TdTugO8p3jBjN8S HilQNA8VdmbYXEty8fAOGOiNrqq1E9YRmgVG5EBpBooGcTT0DkwZVYaeDJzwpU7FfN9TYfmWD ExEUAZ23LjYgxHLfg02OEFRtxXdDECEC6wuhPnwFJE4FbGUMR+D6LvmVbekk3W0a4wx1GkD2W c0ypsSadQgI+CVfcfqykbpD2NtLysvrmzm6VQCLUdeXzglFLxmkILtYtCSv72uOJixPpfwoAv WYr0fAVyoQtnzeoe/zHhJj62QBJRcoX2cWjmEavp2vQEJLzZqWrb+guPIvwjUrCKJ7i8FSfB0 lnJJ2w/jS9+Uqo4SeUIwaYTuskWYONjvgFKi4Ptew+Gdfv1zkB6JlncPyIfxyidWjl27k92zD lkgo7R7 Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Hi Duy, On Tue, 12 Jul 2016, Duy Nguyen wrote: > On Tue, Jul 12, 2016 at 5:51 PM, Jeff King wrote: > > On Tue, Jul 12, 2016 at 05:46:12PM +0200, Duy Nguyen wrote: > > > >> I'm not opposed to letting one worktree see everything, but this move > >> makes it harder to write new scripts (or new builtin commands, even) > >> that works with both single and multiple worktrees because you refer > >> to one ref (in current worktree perspective) differently. If we kill > >> of the main worktree (i.e. git init always creates a linked worktree) > >> then it's less of a problem, but still a nuisance to write > >> refs/worktree/$CURRENT/ everywhere. > > > > True. I gave a suggestion for the reading side, but the writing side > > would still remain tedious. > > > > I wonder if, in a worktree, we could simply convert requests to read or > > write names that do not begin with "refs/" as "refs/worktree/$CURRENT/"? > > That makes it a read/write-time alias conversion, but the actual storage > > is just vanilla (so the ref storage doesn't need to care, and > > reachability just works). > > A conversion like that is already happening, but it works at > git_path() level instead and maps anything outside refs/ to > worktrees/$CURRENT. Wouldn't you agree that the entire discussion goes into a direction that reveals that it might simply be a better idea to require commands that want to have per-worktree refs to do that explicitly? I mean, it looks to me that the harder we try to avoid that, the more problems crop up, some of that as serious as my reported data loss. I do not see any indication that trying even harder to "protect" commands from knowing that they are running in one of many worktrees is making things easier. To the contrary, I expect that direction to hold many more awful surprises for us. The same holds true for the config, BTW. I really have no love for the idea to make the config per-worktree. It just holds too many nasty opportunities for violate the Law of Least Surprises. Just to name one: imagine you check out a different branch in worktree A, then switch worktree B to the branch that A had, and all of a sudden you may end up with a different upstream! Ciao, Dscho