Re: [PATCH v1 1/1] list-objects.c: traverse_trees_and_blobs: rename and tree-wide

From: Teng Long <dyroneteng@gmail.com>
Date: Aug 12, 2021, 07:54 UTC
Message-ID: <20210812075415.5114-1-dyroneteng@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <xmqqsfzf980v.fsf@gitster.g>

>> Sorry but I do not quite get the " and tree-wide" part of the title.

I may have some misunderstandings about "tree-wide". Sorry, it will be resolved in the next patch.

>>s/trees_and_blobs/non_commits/ will result in a name that is much
>>shorter and to the point, I think.

Agree and thanks for explanation.

Will follow your suggestion in next patch.

I don't know why I didn't think of this naming at the time (*headwalls*).

In fact, I discovered this problem while contributing packfile-uris related features (thinking about excluding tag objects), and finally said to myself "So you are here" (although it didn't take so much effort), So I decide to make this patch.

>>The call to it at the end is meant to sweep anything
>>leftover---we will not discover any tag while in the main loop of
>>the caller that iterates over commits (as they cannot contain any
>>tag in there).

Some doubts.

I think at the object relationship level: tag> commit> tree> blob

The tag is on top because of the annotated tag. So, why the tag is in `revs->pending` to deal? I understand it should be the opposite? A commit should pending to a tag, at least equal.

Maybe my understanding is wrong, if so, why this way?

Thank you.