Re: [PATCHv2 00/16] Moving global state into the repository object (part 1)

On Tue, Feb 20, 2018 at 11:03 AM, Junio C Hamano [off-list ref] wrote:

Jonathan Nieder [off-list ref] writes:

quoted

For what it's worth, I think I prefer v1.  I put some comments on why
on patch 0 of v1 and would be interested in your thoughts on them
(e.g. as a reply to that).  I also think that even if we want to
switch to a style that passes around object_store separately from
repository, it is easier to do the migration in two steps: first get
rid of hidden dependencies on the_repository, then do the (simpler)
automatic migration from

 f(the_repository)

to

 f(the_repository->object_store)

*afterwards*.

Thoughts?

Are we envisioning the future in which one repository has more than
one object-store (I am counting an object store and its alternates
that are pointed by its $GIT_OBJECT_DIRECTORY/info/alternates as a
single logical "object store")?  If not, doing f(the_repository)
migration, stopping there without f(the_repository->object_store)
may perfectly be adequate, I would think.

I do not envision that, maybe Christian Couder does?
The partial clone world would be happy with just one object store
per repo, I would think.

The step to take an object store would just add expressiveness
to the code, which may help in understanding what part of the code is
related to what other part of the code, so it may be a readability gain
on its own?