Re: [GSOC RFC PATCH] builtin/repo: add path.in-worktree field
- From
SoutrikDas <valusoutrik@gmail.com>
- Date
- Feb 27, 2026, 03:51 UTC
- Message-ID
- <20260227035122.5588-1-valusoutrik@gmail.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <BEE3B56B-F8E0-43B5-95EA-8506A84CB2EA@gmail.com>
Show 6 quoted lines
> I don't think this is small enough to count as a microproject. A > microproject is something simpler than that. See the microprojects > page [1] for suggestions. They are more straightforward things that > have more chances of being accepted quickly. And since having an accepted > microproject is a mandatory step, you'll probably want it to be merged > as soon as possible.
My bad, by microproject I meant this :
Show 7 quoted lines
> GSoc 2026 Idea : Improve the new git repo command > > Getting started: Build Git from source, experiment with git repo info > and git repo structure commands, study the implementation in builtin/repo.c, > review the initial GSoC proposal and discussions, compare functionality > with git rev-parse and identify gaps, and submit a *micro-patch to > demonstrate familiarity with the codebase*.
I guess I misunderstood, I thought a relevant micropatch to the project idea area ( ie repo.c ) had to be submitted along with a general microproject.
I did submit one code microproject [1] and a doc-fix [2]
> I think that this seems to be easy to do, but the reviewing process > may take some time, so it would be better if you stick to a > one of the selected microprojects.
Now since a microproject in the gsoc idea domain is not mandatory ... I think it would be okay to start on this ? Regardless of it being fully reviewed, I feel like I should do some work on repo.c before writing a gsoc proposal. That way I can better formulate a timeline, maybe.
> Yeah, but then we would need to change all the calls to it, using > the_repository at first. But I really don't know, I'll leave this > discussion for more experienced people.
Alright.
> You can take a look on how `git rev-parse --is-inside-work-tree` is > being tested today and use it as a base, since > `git repo info path.is-inside-work-tree` would return true or false > in the same situations.
Right, I dont know why I didn't do that, I will do that and send a patch v2
[1] : 20260209172445.39536-1-valusoutrik@gmail.com [2] : pull.2187.git.git.1770293021383.gitgitgadget@gmail.com