Re: [PATCH 2/2] ref-filter: support filtering of operational refs

From: Taylor Blau <me@ttaylorr.com>
Date: Jan 2, 2024, 18:49 UTC
Message-ID: <ZZRayoauM6s5XUFR@nand.local>
In-Reply-To: <ZY1PLtPue4PgbhwU@tanuki>

On Thu, Dec 28, 2023 at 11:34:22AM +0100, Patrick Steinhardt wrote:

Show 7 quoted lines

> One interesting question is how we should treat files that look like a
> pseudoref, but which really aren't. I'm not aware of any such files
> written by Git itself, but it could certainly be that a user wrote such
> a file into the repository manually. But given that we're adding new
> behaviour that will be opt-in (e.g. via a new switch) I'd rather err on
> the side of caution and mark any such file as broken instead of silently
> ignoring them.

I probably wouldn't spend a ton of time worrying about this personally. Without additional information, I think it's impossible for us to determine a-priori whether or not a file underneath $GIT_DIR should be interpreted as a pseudo-ref or not.

I agree with your reasoning that since this is opt-in via a new command-line flag, that we're probably OK here enumerating the files in $GIT_DIR, and printing out the ones that look like pseudo-refs.

Thanks, Taylor