Re: [PATCH] maintenance: make unregister idempotent

From: Derrick Stolee <derrickstolee@github.com>
Date: Sep 22, 2022, 12:37 UTC
Message-ID: <bc57439a-bddc-6c1a-a51d-11498d17c206@github.com>
In-Reply-To: <xmqqpmfo4pc7.fsf@gitster.g>

On 9/21/2022 1:19 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:

Show 17 quoted lines

> "Derrick Stolee via GitGitGadget" <gitgitgadget@gmail.com> writes:
> 
>> From: Derrick Stolee <derrickstolee@github.com>
>>
>> The 'git maintenance unregister' subcommand has a step that removes the
>> current repository from the multi-valued maitenance.repo config key.
>> This fails if the repository is not listed in that key. This makes
>> running 'git maintenance unregister' twice result in a failure in the
>> second instance.
>>
>> Make this task idempotent, since the end result is the same in both
>> cases: maintenance will no longer run on this repository.
> 
> I am not sure if this is a good idea.  What is the ultimate reason
> why we want to allow running it blindly without knowing if it is
> necessary?  Is it because there is no easy way to tell if unregister
> is needed in the first place?

We want to leave the internal details of what it means to be registered as hidden to the user. They could look for the repo in the global config, but that seems like a hassle when they just want to make sure they are not currently registered.

Show 11 quoted lines

>> +	# Expect unregister to be idempotent.
>> +	git maintenance unregister
>>  '
> 
> ... given that the user does not have any control over what to
> unregister from the command line (it is decided implicitly by where
> the user is), I am halfway OK with it.
> 
> A user with two repositories may still be upset after running
> "unregister" in the one they did not mean to, and not getting told
> about the mistake, though, e.g.

...

> I wonder if something like the "--force" option,

I like the --force option. I'll add it in v2 and then update Scalar to use that option.

Thanks, -Stolee