Re: What's cooking in git.git (Oct 2018, #02; Sat, 13)

From: Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com>
Date: Oct 12, 2018, 15:02 UTC
Message-ID: <878t33dx8i.fsf@evledraar.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <xmqqh8hr9pxb.fsf@gitster-ct.c.googlers.com>

On Fri, Oct 12 2018, Junio C Hamano wrote:

Show 11 quoted lines

> * ab/gc-doc-update (2018-10-11) 1 commit
>  - gc doc: mention the commit-graph in the intro
>
>  The documentation of "git gc" has been updated to mention that it
>  is no longer limited to "pruning away crufts" but also updates
>  ancillary files like commit-graph as a part of repository
>  optimization.
>
>  Waiting for reactions.
>  cf. <20181010193818.20399-1-avarab@gmail.com>
>  The author seems to feel that this might be controversial.

Probably shouldn't have mentioned that. SZEDER I think had more issues with the "that's not GC" parts of what git-gc is doing, so I'll let him chime in. I'm working on a more general update to gc.c which might bring it more in the "not really GC anymore" direction.

But this patch is just describing the status quo, so I think it should be uncontroversial to merge it, or at least we can have the discussion about what we should do in a different venue than a doc fixup for accurately describing what we're doing now.

Another topic: As noted in <20181010193235.17359-1-avarab@gmail.com> and this follow-up https://public-inbox.org/git/87h8hsexdm.fsf@evledraar.gmail.com/ it would be great if you could pick up the "gc: remove redundant check for gc_auto_threshold" patch. A small change that makes later refactoring a tiny bit smaller and easier to understand.