From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.0 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 Received: from sv.mirrors.kernel.org (sv.mirrors.kernel.org [IPv6:2604:1380:45e3:2400::1]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 74B201F451 for ; Mon, 8 Jan 2024 17:34:12 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: dcvr.yhbt.net; dkim=pass (1024-bit key; unprotected) header.d=pobox.com header.i=@pobox.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=sasl header.b=C/ePy9JD; dkim-atps=neutral Received: from smtp.subspace.kernel.org (wormhole.subspace.kernel.org [52.25.139.140]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by sv.mirrors.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7D1A8284212 for ; Mon, 8 Jan 2024 17:34:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 03D7554BFC; Mon, 8 Jan 2024 17:32:15 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=pobox.com header.i=@pobox.com header.b="C/ePy9JD" Received: from pb-smtp2.pobox.com (pb-smtp2.pobox.com [64.147.108.71]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6193954BCB for ; Mon, 8 Jan 2024 17:32:12 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=pobox.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=pobox.com Received: from pb-smtp2.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1CC1C1D611B; Mon, 8 Jan 2024 12:32:11 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=GNuBvDKpa++jGzhtiRZ6EgW6OQ/3CVQoCoKB1h jy7jY=; b=C/ePy9JDJ9nLNgvFaJVBafZ/gSa7PY6mbI91B6sTN1/tQDfh05Ng/u Ub64YJtPnlERNTpnQ52h67ogVBkl1hgjTDIl/KpOQED0Jw4NhvLyyihfONQZtxA9 YOSi/p+riAWpBhdjMo139VQwmBKwGi4+/SPHePr3pKuWkBkPInIgo= Received: from pb-smtp2.nyi.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 14CF61D611A; Mon, 8 Jan 2024 12:32:11 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [34.125.200.93]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 777D91D6119; Mon, 8 Jan 2024 12:32:10 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) From: Junio C Hamano To: "Ghanshyam Thakkar" Cc: "Elijah Newren" , "Christian Couder" , , Subject: Re: [GSOC][RFC] Heed core.bare from template config file when no command line override given, as a microproject. In-Reply-To: (Ghanshyam Thakkar's message of "Sat, 06 Jan 2024 17:37:18 +0530") References: <85d4e83c-b6c4-4308-ac8c-a65c911c8a95@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 08 Jan 2024 09:32:09 -0800 Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: DA67C400-AE4B-11EE-B7B1-25B3960A682E-77302942!pb-smtp2.pobox.com "Ghanshyam Thakkar" writes: >> Specifically, the commit that introduced the comment never wanted to >> honor core.bare in the template. I do not think I has core.bare in >> mind when I wrote the comment, but I would have described it as the >> same category as the repository format version, i.e. something you >> would not want to copy, if I were pressed to clarify back then. > > Then I suppose this warrants updating the TODO comment in > create_default_files(), which currently can be interpreted as this > being a unwanted behavior. And also amending the testcases which > currently display this as knwon breakage. I obviously agree with that, after saying that I suspect 0f7443bd comes from a misunderstanding ;-). >> If somebody wants to always create a bare repository by having >> core.bare=true in their template and if we wanted to honor it (which >> I am dubious of the value of, by the way), I would think the right >> place to do so would be way before create_default_files() is called. >> When running "git init [$DIR]", long before calling init_db(), we >> decide if we are about to create a bare repository and either create >> $DIR or $DIR/.git. What is in the template, if we really wanted to >> do so, should be read before that happens, no? > > That is what I proposed in my original email, after which I had a > working solution which passed all the tests. That solution was indeed to > check for core.bare in the template before we set GIT_DIR_ENVIRONMENT, > which subsequently creates either $DIR or $DIR/.git as you described > above. Yeah, if this were still in soon after 4f629539 was written, then such a change might have been a useful feature enhancement, but risk of breaking people (third-party tools) who use the same template to initialize both bare and non-bare repositories is there, so... Thanks.