RE: [PATCH v7 2/6] fsmonitor: relocate socket file if .git directory is remote

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jeff Hostetler <git@jeffhostetler.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, September 20, 2022 10:36 AM
> To: Eric DeCosta <edecosta@mathworks.com>; Junio C Hamano
> <gitster@pobox.com>
> Cc: Eric DeCosta via GitGitGadget <gitgitgadget@gmail.com>;
> git@vger.kernel.org; Eric Sunshine <sunshine@sunshineco.com>; Torsten
> Bögershausen <tboegi@web.de>; Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
> <avarab@gmail.com>; Ramsay Jones <ramsay@ramsayjones.plus.com>;
> Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de>
> Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 2/6] fsmonitor: relocate socket file if .git directory is
> remote
> 
> 
> 
> On 9/19/22 7:51 PM, Eric DeCosta wrote:
> >
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
> >> Sent: Monday, September 19, 2022 1:49 PM
> >> To: Jeff Hostetler <git@jeffhostetler.com>
> >> Cc: Eric DeCosta via GitGitGadget <gitgitgadget@gmail.com>;
> >> git@vger.kernel.org; Eric Sunshine <sunshine@sunshineco.com>; Torsten
> >> Bögershausen <tboegi@web.de>; Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
> >> <avarab@gmail.com>; Ramsay Jones <ramsay@ramsayjones.plus.com>;
> >> Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de>; Eric DeCosta
> >> <edecosta@mathworks.com>
> >> Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 2/6] fsmonitor: relocate socket file if .git
> >> directory is remote
> >>
> >> Jeff Hostetler <git@jeffhostetler.com> writes:
> >>
> >>> Aren't we in the middle of a transition from always using the global
> >>> "the_repository" to a passed "r" variable?
> >>> We're getting closer to being able to hide the the global symbol,
> >>> but we're not there yet, right?
> >>
> >> We may still have code that works ONLY on the_repository, but letting
> >> a function take "r" and lettin it ignore is worse than leaving it
> >> explicitly limited to the_repository only, no?
> >>
> >>> I'm thinking that at as long as the global exists, we are not safe
> >>> to have multiple "struct repository" instances, right?
> >>
> >> By itself, Not at all.  It is the code like I am criticizing that makes it unsafe.
> >>
> >> I do not mind adding
> >>
> >> 	if (!r)
> >> 		BUG(...);
> >>
> >> at the place you have the "sweep it under the rug" band-aid, though.
> >
> > Appreciate all the insights and comments. Where are we landing with this?
> Very close to the finish line and I'd like to be able to push these changes over
> that line.
> >
> > -Eric
> >
> 
> I'm OK doing it either way.  Junio seems to prefer the BUG() version, so let's
> go with that.  That lets us make progress on getting rid of direct references to
> "the_repository".
> 
> Jeff