Re: [PATCH] setup: recognize bare repositories with packed-refs

From: Taylor Blau <me@ttaylorr.com>
Date: Dec 8, 2023, 21:09 UTC
Message-ID: <ZXOF75NwxI187QDQ@nand.local>
In-Reply-To: <20231206210836.GA106480@coredump.intra.peff.net>

On Wed, Dec 06, 2023 at 04:08:36PM -0500, Jeff King wrote:

Show 19 quoted lines

> On Wed, Nov 29, 2023 at 04:30:46PM -0500, Taylor Blau wrote:
>
> > On Tue, Nov 28, 2023 at 02:04:46PM -0500, Jeff King wrote:
> > >   - whatever is consuming the embedded repos could "mkdir -p refs
> > >     objects" as needed. This is a minor pain, but I think in the long
> > >     term we are moving to a world where you have to explicitly do
> > >     "GIT_DIR=$PWD/embedded.git" to access an embedded bare repo. So
> > >     they're already special and require some setup; adding an extra step
> > >     may not be so bad.
> >
> > I hope not. I suppose that using embedded bare repositories in a test
> > requires additional setup at least to "cd" into the directory (if they
> > are not using `$GIT_DIR` or `--git-dir` already). But I fear that
> > imposing even a small change like this is too tall an order for how many
> > millions of these exist in the wild across all sorts of projects.
>
> I dunno. I am skeptical that there are millions of these. Who really
> wants to embed bare git repos except for projects related to Git itself,
> which want test vectors? Is there a use case I'm missing?

Just picking on GitHub as an example, my copy has a fair number of embedded bare repositories:

    $ find . -mindepth 2 -type d -name '*.git' | wc -l
    279

That might be an unfair example in general, since GitHub probably has a greater need to embed bare repositories than most other projects. But I think that we shouldn't make our decision here based on volume of embedded bare repositories, but rather on the number of projects which have >1 embedded bare repository.

In other words, the cost of migrating a single project's embedded bare repositories is roughly the same whether there are 1 or 279 of them. So the effort scales with the number of projects, not repositories.

Perhaps I'm over-estimating how difficult this transition would be to impose on users. But it does make me very leery to make this kind of a change without having a better sense of how many of them exist in the wild.

Searching just on GitHub for `path:**/*.git/config` [^1], it looks like there are ~1,400 results. That provides us an upper-bound on the number of projects which have embedded bare repositories, so perhaps I really am overestimating the burden we'd be imposing on other projects.

I dunno :-).

Thanks, Taylor

[^1]: Searching for "path:**/*.git" doesn't quite work, since GitHub's
  search doesn't match directories here. So the search I actually used
  isn't perfect, but it should give us a rough approximation.