Re: [PATCH 00/11] nd/worktree-move update

From: Duy Nguyen <pclouds@gmail.com>
Date: Feb 4, 2017, 11:57 UTC
Message-ID: <CACsJy8BeEUzEt25nN7_eddcUN8=SrQrMSHY5duYLxKxTztfq4A@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <xmqqtw8bf7xn.fsf@gitster.mtv.corp.google.com>

On Sat, Feb 4, 2017 at 1:25 AM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:

Show 7 quoted lines

> Even if you think "the right way" is to add to the iterators, I
> suspect that we can still do incremental fixes?  I agree with the
> order of importance Michael listed in his message (i.e. the index
> and the HEAD first, and then other per-worktree hierarchies at lower
> priority), and I suspect you do, too.  I am not sure that is what
> you called "middle ground", but I think such an incremental approach
> is totally fine.

Yeah index should be fixed independently. Sorry that thought did not occur to me. I counted HEAD as a ref too (i.e. to be managed/iterated by refs subsystem) but I guess it's special enough to be dealt with without ref iterator. I will try to fix these two first.

By middle ground, I was thinking that, now that we have ref iterator interface, we more or less know what the api should look like for a ref user like rev-list, so perhaps we could add a custom (ugly) iterator for per-worktree refs (including reflog). The ugliness is probably buried in refs/files-backend.c again until we clean it up.

-- 
Duy