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-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.2 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_NONE shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2A8CC1F462 for ; Tue, 28 May 2019 16:50:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726874AbfE1QuH (ORCPT ); Tue, 28 May 2019 12:50:07 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp20.pobox.com ([173.228.157.52]:64925 "EHLO pb-smtp20.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726515AbfE1QuG (ORCPT ); Tue, 28 May 2019 12:50:06 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp20.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp20.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BDD146E646; Tue, 28 May 2019 12:50:04 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=sasl; bh=QyvZIeWDESnw NTeUT/tXAPRlNmc=; b=kL5zpyF0JtZpwMuwjaHyaQ4mZpXan4oR3+Ylr+hN252t sZGQeuoGuoVaHgtL1wl9lACIQJduL/qnTaUXVBdQj+TGjBOBcgZnf67cUHs1JM+K jHZrKSVgaqkjPIZROrvET6K16YNagN81itlRTv3MtiGnEF40YEZrQ7yDiebrtQI= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; q=dns; s=sasl; b=PfIMaM nyn7RA67guGMWVK/jSdyUugvKjEQavL3kHXzguIGinfKUMz5tr+KB45+hU60Jfl1 WGhsg2inTT625hggmDHhGzcrfJEoRN4O2gWPDlHd9bXzQlyDVporLnri6d9jEGaW 9dwZRyTQkeT1jD5HRHUjFuJuyFtzaGGIckKxg= Received: from pb-smtp20.sea.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp20.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B690B6E645; Tue, 28 May 2019 12:50:04 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [34.76.80.147]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp20.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id CFFB26E640; Tue, 28 May 2019 12:50:01 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) From: Junio C Hamano To: =?utf-8?B?w4Z2YXIgQXJuZmrDtnLDsA==?= Bjarmason Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, Jeff King , Adam Roben , Bryan Larsen , Matthias Urlichs , Eric Sunshine Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] hash-object doc: elaborate on -w and --literally promises References: <20190520215312.10363-1-avarab@gmail.com> <20190520215312.10363-3-avarab@gmail.com> Date: Tue, 28 May 2019 09:49:59 -0700 In-Reply-To: <20190520215312.10363-3-avarab@gmail.com> (=?utf-8?B?IsOGdmFy?= =?utf-8?B?IEFybmZqw7Zyw7A=?= Bjarmason"'s message of "Mon, 20 May 2019 23:53:11 +0200") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 X-Pobox-Relay-ID: A2C161F6-8168-11E9-B04B-B0405B776F7B-77302942!pb-smtp20.pobox.com Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org =C3=86var Arnfj=C3=B6r=C3=B0 Bjarmason 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.