Re: [PATCH 5/5] maintenance: add 'is-needed' subcommand
- From
Patrick Steinhardt <ps@pks.im>
- Date
- Nov 4, 2025, 05:54 UTC
- Message-ID
- <aQmU_hOPO55_ojw2@pks.im>
- In-Reply-To
- <CAOLa=ZSsEygvz1_aj4KomfF0Jo0vJi3yVLtJbhLX=RLgW6_GzQ@mail.gmail.com>
On Mon, Nov 03, 2025 at 09:18:35AM -0800, Karthik Nayak wrote:
Show 24 quoted lines
> Patrick Steinhardt <ps@pks.im> writes: > > > On Fri, Oct 31, 2025 at 03:22:25PM +0100, Karthik Nayak wrote: > >> diff --git a/Documentation/git-maintenance.adoc b/Documentation/git-maintenance.adoc > >> index 540b5cf68b..edcc88f4d0 100644 > >> --- a/Documentation/git-maintenance.adoc > >> +++ b/Documentation/git-maintenance.adoc > >> @@ -84,6 +85,11 @@ The `unregister` subcommand will report an error if the current repository > >> is not already registered. Use the `--force` option to return success even > >> when the current repository is not registered. > >> > >> +is-needed:: > >> + Check whether maintenance needs to be run without actually running it. > >> + Exits with a 0 status code if maintenance needs to be run, 1 otherwise. > >> + Can be used along with `--task`. Ideally should be used with '--auto'. > > > > Okay. I assume when `--task` is not given we'll check all tasks > > specified by the configured strategy? Might make sense to document if > > so. > > > > Actually no. It's similar to the 'run' command, if nothing is specified, > we check `maintenance.<task>.enabled`. By default it is only enabled for > 'gc'. This is important information, I will add it in.
But we use `initialize_task_config()`, and that function knows to use the configured strategy unless it's given an explicit list of tasks. So we do use the maintenance strategy.
> >> diff --git a/builtin/gc.c b/builtin/gc.c > >> index 72177305ff..4d20487ed6 100644 > >> --- a/builtin/gc.c > >> +++ b/builtin/gc.c
[snip]
Show 15 quoted lines
> >> + } else {
> >> + /* When not using --auto, we should always require maintenance. */
> >> + is_needed = true;
> >> + }
> >
> > I guess for now this is good enough, but it's not quite true. Some tasks
> > won't require maintenance even without `--auto`, like for example when
> > the reftable stack only has a single table.
> >
> > Patrick
>
> Good point. Thought I'm not sure how we'd go about it. Initially I
> wanted to not have an `--auto` flag and simply make it the default
> behavior. But that would restrict us from introducing the `schedule`
> flag in the future. Which I think might be a worthwhile addition.Yeah, agreed.
I guess eventually we could extend `auto_condition()` to honor the "--auto" flag:
- If it's set the task verifies that it needs to trigger housekeeping
tasks with heuristics. - Otherwise it checks whether there even is anything that could be
cleaned up.But that's certainly out of scope of this patch series, I think it's good enough to bail on that specific part for now.
Patrick