From: Junio C Hamano <email@example.com> To: "Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason" <firstname.lastname@example.org> Cc: email@example.com, Jeff King <firstname.lastname@example.org>, Adam Roben <email@example.com>, Bryan Larsen <firstname.lastname@example.org>, Matthias Urlichs <email@example.com>, Eric Sunshine <firstname.lastname@example.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] hash-object doc: elaborate on -w and --literally promises Date: Tue, 28 May 2019 09:49:59 -0700 [thread overview] Message-ID: <email@example.com> (raw) In-Reply-To: <firstname.lastname@example.org> (=?utf-8?B?IsOGdmFy?= =?utf-8?B?IEFybmZqw7Zyw7A=?= Bjarmason"'s message of "Mon, 20 May 2019 23:53:11 +0200") Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <email@example.com> writes: > Clarify the hash-object docs to explicitly note that the --literally > option guarantees that a loose object will be written, but that a > normal -w ("write") invocation doesn't. > > At first I thought talking about "loose object" in the docs was a > mistake in 83115ac4a8 ("git-hash-object.txt: document --literally > option", 2015-05-04), but as is clear from 5ba9a93b39 ("hash-object: > add --literally option", 2014-09-11) this was intended all along. I have to admit that this "loose only" was the doing of my defeatism. IOW, I was utterly pessimistic that I would be able to add more types (and more importantly, unbounded number of random types) of objects in the packstream. So, "loose object" limitation is a practical one for those of us who cannot think of a reasonable way to cram arbitrary number of random new types into just 3 bits of the "type" bitfield, and not inherent to the "hash-object --literally" command. So I am very happy to see the first hunk of this patch, but I doubt there is much value in the last sentence the second hunk adds. Thanks.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-05-28 16:50 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2019-05-20 21:53 [PATCH 0/3] hash-object doc: small fixes Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason 2019-05-20 21:53 ` [PATCH 1/3] hash-object doc: stop mentioning git-cvsimport Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason 2019-05-22 4:57 ` Jeff King 2019-05-20 21:53 ` [PATCH 2/3] hash-object doc: elaborate on -w and --literally promises Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason 2019-05-22 5:08 ` Jeff King 2019-05-24 10:04 ` Jakub Narebski 2019-05-24 10:12 ` Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason 2019-05-28 6:06 ` Jeff King 2019-05-28 16:56 ` Junio C Hamano 2019-05-28 16:49 ` Junio C Hamano [this message] 2019-05-20 21:53 ` [PATCH 3/3] hash-object doc: point to ls-files and rev-parse Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason 2019-05-22 5:15 ` Jeff King
Reply instructions: You may reply publicly 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: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style List information: http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html * Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to switches of git-send-email(1): git send-email \ --firstname.lastname@example.org \ --email@example.com \ --firstname.lastname@example.org \ --email@example.com \ --firstname.lastname@example.org \ --email@example.com \ --firstname.lastname@example.org \ --email@example.com \ --firstname.lastname@example.org \ --subject='Re: [PATCH 2/3] hash-object doc: elaborate on -w and --literally promises' \ /path/to/YOUR_REPLY https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html * If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this inbox: https://80x24.org/mirrors/git.git This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).