Re: [PATCH v2] odb: do not list our own refs as alternate refs in the quarantine

From: Justin Tobler <jltobler@gmail.com>
Date: Nov 4, 2026, 16:58 UTC
Message-ID: <autiszIPCf4Aes9T@denethor>
In-Reply-To: <CAL71e4M0t2ZgbqOd4MXeX3vH2W7pPRSMg+8i8epXYbh5-5t8Hw@mail.gmail.com>

On 26/11/04 11:32AM, Kristofer Karlsson wrote:

Show 10 quoted lines

> I agree with that long-term direction.  What do you think we should
> do for the short term?  I see a few options:
>  1. A smaller, more focused patch in the alternate refs code, as Peff
>    suggested in the other message.
>  2. Your read-only transaction environment for the connectivity check,
>    (if you want to take that on, I would probably mess it up :-) ).
>  3. Only a regression test for now, with the hidden refs case marked as
>    test_expect_failure, so that we do not lose track of it.
>  4. Or nothing, and wait for the long-term fix, as nobody seems to be
>    hit hard by this at the moment.

IMO, I think the patch suggested by Peff is a reasonably fix for this problem. Later down the line I will probably also revisit how "files" ODB transactions manage the object directory, but there are some other transaction related topics I'm hoping to land first.

Thanks, -Justin