Re: [PATCH 03/13] init: unconditionally create the "info" directory

From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Dec 21, 2021, 02:10 UTC
Message-ID: <xmqqr1a6so6c.fsf@gitster.g>
In-Reply-To: <211221.861r26u4b9.gmgdl@evledraar.gmail.com>

Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com> writes:

Show 11 quoted lines

> I don't see why we'd consider that as a worthwhile direction to go
> in. The "git-init" documentation states:
>     
>     This command creates an empty Git repository - basically a `.git`
>     directory with subdirectories for `objects`, `refs/heads`,
>     `refs/tags`, and template files. 
>
> I.e. we promise to create "objects", but not "objects/{info,pack}", even
> though we've done so since f49fb35d0d5 (git-init-db: create "pack"
> subdirectory under objects, 2005-06-27) and d57306c7945 (Create
> objects/info/ directory in init-db., 2005-08-20).

I view it as a documentation bug, though.

The only thing we need to promise is that (1) the directory prepared by "git init" will be recognised as a repository by the current and future versions of Git (and hopefully the existing ones, too), and (2) versions of Git will not barf due to missing directory and stuff due to end-user mischief around custom templates. I do not think we even need refs/heads/ directory and I do not see that, especially with a presence with "basically" there, the sentence promises that we will always create refs/tags/ directory. For (1), only objects/, refs/ and HEAD is necessary, as long as (2) is satisfied by lazy creation of leading paths.

We would want to be able to cope with a repository that lost .git/info directory due to loss of it in custom templates anyway. Just like we create leading missing directories lazily for any hierarchy under .git/, we should create .git/info on-demand.

Pre-creating .git/info might be nice, but becomes much less important after it happens, and that is why I view it as a much lower priority than what Derrick suggested.