Re: [PATCH 9/9] refs: add a '--required' flag to 'git refs optimize'

From: Karthik Nayak <karthik.188@gmail.com>
Date: Oct 14, 2025, 15:08 UTC
Message-ID: <CAOLa=ZTRG=x5PofmSSfHhJ3Lig2NjhU8buVWAXU=aKom2PDsDg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <xmqqh5w250lw.fsf@gitster.g>

Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> writes:

Show 14 quoted lines

> Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> writes:
>
>> Perhaps "--check-" followed by a word specific to what we are trying
>> to achieve (e.g., if we are trying to see if auto-compaction is
>> necessary, "--check-for-auto" "check for auto compaction")?  I
>> dunno.
>
> After reading what you did in the previou step, I am reasonably sure
> "required" is a wrong word to use, with or without other words like
> "check".  Semantically it is similar to the should_pack_refs() check
> that we use for pack-refs even before "optimize" came.  We expect it
> to answer this question cheaply: are we better off if we repacked,
> or can we go on without repacking for now?  It is not about "are we
> performing so poorly that we MUST optimize now?"

I agree '--required' isn't the best name, and like we discussed '--dry-run' wouldn't be either since that would imply that the work is being done but not persisted.

I was leaning towards '--check', which is simple. But It might be nicer to be verbose here and simply add something like '--is-worthwhile'.

Being verbose here is okay, since it will only be used sparingly and specifically by those who require such a use case.