Message ID | cover.1652915424.git.me@ttaylorr.com (mailing list archive) |
---|---|
Headers | show |
Series | cruft packs | expand |
On 5/18/2022 7:10 PM, Taylor Blau wrote: > Here is another reroll of my series to implement "cruft packs", which is based > on the v2.36 tree, and incorporates feedback from the discussion we had about > mixed-version GCs with cruft packs in [1]. > > The changes here are limited to: > > - a cautionary note in Documentation/technical/cruft-packs.txt > describing the potential interaction between pruning GCs across pre- > and post-cruft pack versions of Git, as discussed towards the bottom > of [2] I think this documentation is sufficient guarding against this issue, which is not so critical as to do something more involved. When users opt-in to using cruft packs, they should know about their scenario enough to know if they would stumble into this issue. > - updating the `finalize_hashfile()` calls for writing `.mtimes` files > to indicate that they are `FSYNC_COMPONENT_PACK_METADATA`, since the > original version of this series predates the fine-grained fsync > configuration in 2.36. Good to have this update and not require it to be handled at merge time by the maintainer. > As always, a range-diff is below. Thanks in advance for taking another > look! Looking at the range-diff, I'm happy with this version. Thanks, -Stolee
On Wed, May 18 2022, Taylor Blau wrote: > Here is another reroll of my series to implement "cruft packs", which is based > on the v2.36 tree, and incorporates feedback from the discussion we had about > mixed-version GCs with cruft packs in [1]. > > The changes here are limited to: > > - a cautionary note in Documentation/technical/cruft-packs.txt > describing the potential interaction between pruning GCs across pre- > and post-cruft pack versions of Git, as discussed towards the bottom > of [2] > > - updating the `finalize_hashfile()` calls for writing `.mtimes` files > to indicate that they are `FSYNC_COMPONENT_PACK_METADATA`, since the > original version of this series predates the fine-grained fsync > configuration in 2.36. > > As always, a range-diff is below. Thanks in advance for taking another > look! I left some minor & nit-y comments on this v4, but overall I think this looks really good with not much to add.
Derrick Stolee <derrickstolee@github.com> writes: >> - updating the `finalize_hashfile()` calls for writing `.mtimes` files >> to indicate that they are `FSYNC_COMPONENT_PACK_METADATA`, since the >> original version of this series predates the fine-grained fsync >> configuration in 2.36. > > Good to have this update and not require it to be handled at merge > time by the maintainer. Heh, my rerere database is good enough to make it a non-issue ;-) >> As always, a range-diff is below. Thanks in advance for taking another >> look! > > Looking at the range-diff, I'm happy with this version. Thanks. I am tempted to mark the topic as "expecting (hopefully the final) reroll", to be merged down to 'next' soonish.
On Fri, May 20, 2022 at 04:19:15PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > >> As always, a range-diff is below. Thanks in advance for taking another > >> look! > > > > Looking at the range-diff, I'm happy with this version. > > Thanks. I am tempted to mark the topic as "expecting (hopefully the > final) reroll", to be merged down to 'next' soonish. Here it is: https://lore.kernel.org/git/cover.1653088640.git.me@ttaylorr.com/. Thanks, Taylor