Re: What's cooking in git.git (Feb 2025, #09; Fri, 28)

From: Patrick Steinhardt <ps@pks.im>
Date: Mar 4, 2025, 06:27 UTC
Message-ID: <Z8adWTssWtaNTfx4@pks.im>
In-Reply-To: <xmqqldtmvyfa.fsf@gitster.g>

On Mon, Mar 03, 2025 at 09:03:53AM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:

Show 27 quoted lines

> shejialuo <shejialuo@gmail.com> writes:
> 
> > On Fri, Feb 28, 2025 at 04:45:31PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> >
> >> * sj/ref-consistency-checks-more (2025-02-27) 9 commits
> >>  - builtin/fsck: add `git refs verify` child process
> >>  - packed-backend: check whether the "packed-refs" is sorted
> >>  - packed-backend: add "packed-refs" entry consistency check
> >>  - packed-backend: check whether the refname contains NUL characters
> >>  - packed-backend: add "packed-refs" header consistency check
> >>  - packed-backend: check if header starts with "# pack-refs with: "
> >>  - packed-backend: check whether the "packed-refs" is regular file
> >>  - builtin/refs: get worktrees without reading head information
> >>  - t0602: use subshell to ensure working directory unchanged
> >> 
> >>  "git fsck" becomes more careful when checking the refs.
> >> 
> >>  Comments?
> >>  source: <Z8CMx7O19PMs9sVY@ArchLinux>
> >
> > I think I have addressed the comments from you, Patrick and Karthik.
> > Could we make the patch into "next"?
> 
> Mine was merely a small kibitzing on the logic flow structure, and I
> didn't really looked at the larger picture beyond that part of the
> code I looked at.  Let's hear from Patrick and Karthik (cc'ed) if
> they find the result of the updates satisfactory.

Yes, I'm happy with the current state of this patch series. I'm a tiny bit worried about the new call to `git refs verify` in git-fsck(1) being added this late into the release cycle as we're now exercising a bunch of new code with only a few weeks of testing. My basic assumption is that mostly noone uses `git refs verify` explicitly right now, so all of the code we have introduced there over the last couple of releases did not yet receive much testing at all.

So while I think that executing the command in git-fsck(1) is a good thing overall, I would feel a bit more comfortable if that last commit of the series landed in the next release cycle. But maybe I'm just being overly cautious?

Patrick