Re: [PATCH 2/2] Remove unused index tracking code.
- From
Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
- Date
- Oct 20, 2006, 01:35 UTC
- Message-ID
- <7vhcxzrcq6.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net>
- In-Reply-To
- <Pine.LNX.4.64.0610192058130.1971@xanadu.home>
Nicolas Pitre <nico@cam.org> writes:
Show 14 quoted lines
> This patch in particular creates additional restrictions on pack > files that were not present before. And I don't think this is a good > thing. > > This patch impose an ordering on REF_DELTA objects that doesn't need to > exist. Say for example that an OFS_DELTA depends on an object which is > a REF_DELTA object. With this patch any pack with the base for that > REF_DELTA stored after the OFS_DELTA object will be broken. > > And to really do thin pack fixing properly we really want to just append > missing base objects at the end of the pack which falls in the broken > case above. > > So this is a NAK from me.
I agree.
By the way, it is rather rare for us to see a NAK on this list. I'd welcome to see more of them ;-).