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

From: Duy Nguyen <pclouds@gmail.com>
Date: Feb 3, 2017, 08:59 UTC
Message-ID: <CACsJy8Cq8sY1hL75Xs_MMr9r_+jjr7p+58D+0GhT3mgSgiUEtg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <xmqqmve4s5r2.fsf@gitster.mtv.corp.google.com>

On Fri, Feb 3, 2017 at 3:21 AM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:

Show 11 quoted lines

> Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de> writes:
>
>> Also, the more important reply was Peff's reply that suggested that the
>> proposed fix was incomplete, as it misses --unpack-unreachable:
>> https://public-inbox.org/git/20160601160143.GA9219@sigill.intra.peff.net/
>
> While I think that --unpack-unreachable thing is a symptom of the
> basic approach of patching things up at the wrong level, if you are
> hinting that fix to the issue that gc does not pay attention to
> various anchoring point in other worktrees is more important than
> adding new commands to "worktree", I fully agree with that.

Just to make it clear. It's not like I put new worktree commands on higher priority. "worktree move/remove" was more or less ready for a long time and the gc problem was blocked by ref-iterator series (which entered master a few moths ago, but then I was busy with other things and couldn't get right back to the gc issue).

You didn't answer Johannes's rhetoric question though: "It should be possible to do that redesign work while having a small workaround in place that unbreaks, say, me?"

I assume "the right way" is still updating refs subsystem so that we can have a ref iterator to traverse all refs, or just one worktree, etc. Should I keep looking for a middle ground (maybe better than the linked series) to "unbreak Johannes"? I ignored all those comments (about --unpack-reachable and bisect refs) because I saw no chance of an updated series getting in git.git anyway.

-- 
Duy