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=-3.9 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,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 634BE1F4B4 for ; Thu, 21 Jan 2021 03:51:38 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1732289AbhAUDuf (ORCPT ); Wed, 20 Jan 2021 22:50:35 -0500 Received: from pb-smtp21.pobox.com ([173.228.157.53]:50842 "EHLO pb-smtp21.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1733249AbhAUDtp (ORCPT ); Wed, 20 Jan 2021 22:49:45 -0500 Received: from pb-smtp21.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp21.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 66E1A101A65; Wed, 20 Jan 2021 22:45:22 -0500 (EST) (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; s=sasl; bh=8MSf6uENHfxgvil38xdfDVmeQHQ=; b=fzXjmE fRwp9JStRpeQAf54TO7/mTzOOgU7iW7nSk88xpPOGRqAjdMujFew/fhGx10/E19j z9HXXRsPcEMsjtioBh+pw79fYvcmoDN64nLTeFmFJo50S4WeP0YAC070PeV31EZT svRa+4K9QZzT82ggZZ9A6C535uTpqvB6Ikerg= 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; q=dns; s=sasl; b=ezbrLneLM2G82MD3aCAd1VUP+K/yIkfL 2xuQE49ET+17paSHQoEYNkO87h0FeScO+lhSjvFPnSxcWnGMtXz/dic8NMBrPa9U ePi9Qp33i01zZHUxXSnNIMcMCvd7BA1kEHWUQNNNMp8mzGc8h394mI1JU4wP2llY laJTbxYM1HE= Received: from pb-smtp21.sea.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp21.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5FE04101A64; Wed, 20 Jan 2021 22:45:22 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [104.196.36.241]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp21.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id A8DDA101A62; Wed, 20 Jan 2021 22:45:19 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) From: Junio C Hamano To: Derrick Stolee Cc: Taylor Blau , git@vger.kernel.org, peff@peff.net, dstolee@microsoft.com Subject: Re: [PATCH 09/10] builtin/repack.c: extract loose object handling References: <98c65017-8c22-a21f-0e86-a15d91bd7f70@gmail.com> Date: Wed, 20 Jan 2021 19:45:17 -0800 In-Reply-To: <98c65017-8c22-a21f-0e86-a15d91bd7f70@gmail.com> (Derrick Stolee's message of "Wed, 20 Jan 2021 08:59:48 -0500") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.1.90 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 151AE002-5B9B-11EB-8578-D609E328BF65-77302942!pb-smtp21.pobox.com Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Derrick Stolee writes: > 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? Yeah, sounds like a trivially obvious improvement to me. It does not matter to reviewers who are very well aware that the series is about adding "repack -g", but it may end up being confusing when somebody tries to see what commit the feature was added later when the help from the cover letter is not available.