Re: fetching packs and storing them as packs
- From
Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
- Date
- Oct 29, 2006, 05:16 UTC
- Message-ID
- <7v3b9766rc.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net>
- In-Reply-To
- <20061029043818.GA3650@spearce.org>
Shawn Pearce <spearce@spearce.org> writes:
Show 9 quoted lines
> Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net> wrote:
>> Shawn Pearce <spearce@spearce.org> writes:
>>
>> So how about pack-X{40}.volatile that marks an eligible one for
>> repacking?
>
> Then anyone who has an existing pack would need to create that
> file first as soon as they got this newer version of Git... not
> very upgrade friendly if you ask me.Ah, I mixed things up completely. You're right. Having .keep leaves that pack as is (and lack of matching .keep causes it to be repacked -- people do not have .keep so everything should be repacked as before).
Show 7 quoted lines
>> Then we can make "pack-objects --unpacked" to pretend the ones
>> with corresponding .volatile as if the objects in them are
>> loose, without breaking backward compatibility.
>
> Currently I'm changing --unpacked= to match without needing quoting.
> I'm allowing it to match an exact pack name or if it starts with
> "pack-" and matches the last 50 ("pack-X{40}.pack") of the pack name.I think is a very sane thing to do (I should have done that from the beginning). I do not like "the last 50", but I do not have objection to make it take either full path or just the filename under objects/pack/ (so not "the last 50" but "filename w/o slash").