On Tue, Jan 30, 2018 at 1:39 PM, Derrick Stolee <sto...@gmail.com> wrote: > Thanks to everyone who gave comments on v1. I tried my best to respond to > all of the feedback, but may have missed some while I was doing several > renames, including: > > * builtin/graph.c -> builtin/commit-graph.c > * packed-graph.[c|h] -> commit-graph.[c|h] > * t/t5319-graph.sh -> t/t5318-commit-graph.sh > > Because of these renames (and several type/function renames) the diff > is too large to conveniently share here. > > Some issues that came up and are addressed: > > * Use <hash> instead of <oid> when referring to the graph-<hash>.graph > filenames and the contents of graph-head. > * 32-bit timestamps will not cause undefined behavior. > * timestamp_t is unsigned, so they are never negative. > * The config setting "core.commitgraph" now only controls consuming the > graph during normal operations and will not block the commit-graph > plumbing command. > * The --stdin-commits is better about sanitizing the input for strings > that do not parse to OIDs or are OIDs for non-commit objects. > > One unresolved comment that I would like consensus on is the use of > globals to store the config setting and the graph state. I'm currently > using the pattern from packed_git instead of putting these values in > the_repository. However, we want to eventually remove globals like > packed_git. Should I deviate from the pattern _now_ in order to keep > the problem from growing, or should I keep to the known pattern?
I have a series doing the conversion in https://github.com/stefanbeller/git/tree/object-store that is based on 2.16. While the commits are structured for easy review (to not miss any of the globals that that series is based upon), I did not come up with a good strategy how to take care of series in flight that add more globals. So I think for now you'd want to keep it as global vars, such that it is consistent with the code base and then we'll figure out how to do the conversion one step at a time. Please do not feel stopped or hindered by my slow pace of working through that series, maybe I'll have to come up with another approach that is better for upstream (rebasing that series is a pain, as upstream moves rather quickly. Maybe I'll have to send that series in smaller chunks). > Finally, I tried to clean up my incorrect style as I was recreating > these commits. Feel free to be merciless in style feedback now that the > architecture is more stable. ok, will do. Thanks, Stefan
