Re: [PATCH 08/19] loose: write loose objects map via their source

> Patrick Steinhardt <ps@pks.im> writes:
> 
> > When a repository is configured to have a compatibility hash algorithm
> > we keep track of object ID mappings for loose objects via the loose
> > object map. This map simply maps an object ID of the actual hash to the
> > object ID of the compatibility hash. This loose object map is an
> > inherent property of the loose files backend and thus of one specific
> > object source.
> >
> > Refactor the interfaces to reflect this by requiring a `struct
> > odb_source` as input instead of a repository. This prepares for
> > subsequent commits where we will refactor writing of loose objects to
> > work on a `struct odb_source`, as well.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Patrick Steinhardt <ps@pks.im>
> > ---
> >  loose.c       | 16 +++++++++-------
> >  loose.h       |  4 +++-
> >  object-file.c |  6 +++---
> >  3 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/loose.c b/loose.c
> > index 519f5db7935..e8ea6e7e24b 100644
> > --- a/loose.c
> > +++ b/loose.c
> > @@ -166,7 +166,8 @@ int repo_write_loose_object_map(struct repository *repo)
> >  	return -1;
> >  }
> >
> > -static int write_one_object(struct repository *repo, const struct object_id *oid,
> > +static int write_one_object(struct odb_source *source,
> 
> Nit: In one of the earlier commits, we renamed a function working on a
> particular source to have the '_source' suffix. Should we do the same
> here?
> 
> I understand that this is related to a specific source (loose files) and
> probably would move into its own file under the objects namespace. But
> perhaps something to think about.