Re: [PATCH v2 5/5] Reftable support for git-core
- From
Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
- Date
- Jan 29, 2020, 18:43 UTC
- Message-ID
- <xmqqh80e5cjk.fsf@gitster-ct.c.googlers.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <20200129104754.GE4218@coredump.intra.peff.net>
Jeff King <peff@peff.net> writes:
Show 9 quoted lines
> Making "refs" a file instead of a directory does work nicely, as any > attempts to read or write would get ENOTDIR. And we can fool > is_git_directory() as long as it's marked executable. That's OK on POSIX > systems, but I'm not sure how it would work on Windows (or maybe it > would work just fine, since we presumably just say "yep, everything is > executable"). > > So perhaps that's enough, and what we put in HEAD won't matter (since > nobody will be able to write into refs/ anyway).
I wonder if it would help to take the "looser repository detection" code alone and have it in a release, way before the rest of the reftable topic is ready. Then by the time a repository created by a reftable-enabled Git appears on people's disks, all the older versions of Git that are still in people's hands would at least know that it is a repository supported by future Git that they themselves do not know how to handle, stop repository discovery correctly and refrain from damaging the repository with an extension unknown to them?