Re: [PATCH 2/1] repack: warn if bitmaps are explicitly enabled with keep files

[Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>]

Jeff King <peff@peff.net> writes:

>
> A much more robust solution would be to stop conflating user-provided
> permanent .keep files with temporary locks. I think that was a mistaken
> design added many years ago. We probably could introduce a different
> filename for the temporary locks (though I am not entirely convinced
> they are necessary in the first place, as gc expiration-times would
> generally save a racily-written packfile anyway).

True, true (and I tend to agree).

> Or perhaps we could differentiate our temporary locks from "real" .keep
> files by looking at the content; I think our locks always say something
> like "(receive|receive)-pack \d+ on .*", and it wouldn't be too onerous
> to commit to that, I think (or even adjust it to something even more
> unambiguous).

True, but it may be overkill to open and read.

> It does muddy the meaning of packed_git.pack_keep a bit.  Some callers
> would want to consider it kept in either case (i.e., for purposes of
> pruning, we delete neither) and some would want it kept only for
> non-locks (for packing, duplicating the objects is OK). So I think we'd
> end up with two bits there, and callers would have to use one or the
> other as appropriate.

Yeah, I agree that we'd need to treat them separately in the longer
run.

Thanks.