Re: [PATCH] Add .git/version

From: Martin Atukunda <matlads@dsmagic.com>
Date: Nov 17, 2005, 19:08 UTC
Message-ID: <20051117190848.GA5745@igloo.ds.co.ug>
In-Reply-To: <200511171741.23147.Josef.Weidendorfer@gmx.de>

On Thu, Nov 17, 2005 at 05:41:23PM +0100, Josef Weidendorfer wrote:

Show 18 quoted lines

> On Thursday 17 November 2005 17:33, Andreas Ericsson wrote:
> > > Why? Ideally, the git commands first should check if they can handle the
> > > repository format. If they can not handle the version, they should bail
> > > out with an error [*]
> > > Now suppose we want to release Git 2 without change the repository
> > > format at all. Thus, even if Git 1 tool *would* work with repositories
> > > created by Git 2, they will fail in the version check!
> > > 
> > 
> > Not that I have an opinion on these changes, but Netscape 7 still 
> > handles HTTP 1.1. Just because we up the major-number for git doesn't 
> > mean we have to do the same for the repository format version.
> 
> Of course we do not want that.
> My comment was about this, as the proposed patch installed a
> .git/version file with the git version in it, which would lead to
> this strange result.
>

I agree, I'll resubmit a patch to create a .git/version file that simply says 1.

which specific git commands would most likely want to know about the version of the repo format? I could look at them to see what needs to be changed so that they don't corrupt a repo, or as Johannes said, the use of this file would become handy only when an incompatible change is made. In which case, init-db.c just creates it for now, as a simple safe guard.

- Martin -

-- 
Due to a shortage of devoted followers, the production of great leaders has been discontinued.