Re: Reftable progress

From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Jun 29, 2020, 19:51 UTC
Message-ID: <xmqqr1txfy6v.fsf@gitster.c.googlers.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAFQ2z_Ohp29=Txu9ikn1i_GJQ8eYV9HNrKqSpAOMNamL92YZYQ@mail.gmail.com>

Han-Wen Nienhuys <hanwen@google.com> writes:

Show 7 quoted lines

> On Tue, Jun 23, 2020 at 12:03 AM Han-Wen Nienhuys <hanwen@google.com> wrote:
>> The bottom 2 commits should be OK to merge as is into next.
>> ("checkout: add '\n' to reflog message", "lib-t6000.sh: write tag
>> using git-update-ref")
>
> The patch t3432: use git-reflog to inspect the reflog for HEAD can
> also be merged as is.

Yeah, carving test updates in the early parts out of the series and have them in 'next' and then in 'master' may make sense. Good idea.

Show 6 quoted lines

>> The major open question is how to handle per-worktree refs.  My idea
>> is that, on creation, the reftable backend can figure out if it is
>> running in a worktree or in the main repository. If it is running in
>> worktree X, we could read/write pseudorefs as ~X/PSEUDO_REF.
>
> I figured out a better way to do this. See the series that I am  posting today.

It seems that patches started trickling in but perhaps missing pieces are mailspools somewhere and would arrive later? I'll check the list archive tomorrow to see if all 20 patches have arrived.

Thanks.