From: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Date: Tue, 07 Apr 2026 04:24:32 GMT
Subject: Re: [WIP PATCH] fast-export: emit deletions first
Message-ID: <20260407042432.GA627864@coredump.intra.peff.net>
In-Reply-To: <CABPp-BHhXQc-s8rF1n+AQ0VodX2KuiahcAOcg2msR1eZrUSsCA@mail.gmail.com>

On Mon, Apr 06, 2026 at 02:44:05PM -0700, Elijah Newren wrote:

> > It's also possible that sorting should be the responsibility of the
> > receiver. I.e., should fast-import see:
> >
> >   M 100644 :blob_label a/b
> >   D a
> >
> > and figure it out? Or maybe we want both (to help other consumers of
> > fast-export, but also to help fast-import when consuming output of other
> > sources).
> 
> Would re-ordering on fast-import's side introduce bugs or violate
> user's assumptions?  Right now, fast-import has no check to prevent
> more than one command for the same pathname being given, and has a
> last-entry-wins ruling.  Thus filemodify PATH followed by filedelete
> PATH gives different results than reversing the order.  Most probably
> wouldn't care or want to ever do that, but I could see it as a way of
> allowing you to change your mind in the stream and override an earlier
> directive you sent.

Hmm, good point. It probably is better to leave the reading side as-is,
then, to be on the safe side.

-Peff