From: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Date: Thu, 28 Jul 2011 16:47:58 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 4/4] upload-archive: use start_command instead of fork
Message-ID: <20110728164758.GA15931@sigill.intra.peff.net>
In-Reply-To: <20110728160845.GA14337@sigill.intra.peff.net>

On Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 10:08:45AM -0600, Jeff King wrote:

> > Thanks for the notice. And no, not at all :(
> > 
> > OK then. I'll probably have to rewrite this to use start_async +
> > dup-bonanza instead of start_command...
> 
> What's the issue? In my final version, I didn't think I changed
> run_upload_archive much at all. I would think there would be a trivial
> text conflict at the end of run_upload_archive, but the semantics should
> otherwise be the same.

Ah, nevermind. I see now; the command-line option interface to "git
archive" is not as rich as what you can pass via write_archive.

I think you can get around it by adding an option to "git archive" to
indicate that we are filling a remote request, which is the only
extra information that my series adds.

I do think the start_async approach is a little more natural, though. If
the dup() bits get too ugly, it would not be that hard to make the
archive code write to a specific descriptor.

-Peff