Re: [RFC PATCH 2/2] core.fsyncObjectFiles: make the docs less flippant

Hi Junio and Ævar,

On Thu, 17 Sep 2020, Junio C Hamano wrote:

Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason  [off-list ref] writes:

quoted

As amusing as Linus's original prose[1] is here it doesn't really explain
in any detail to the uninitiated why you would or wouldn't enable
this, and the counter-intuitive reason for why git wouldn't fsync your
precious data.

So elaborate (a lot) on why this may or may not be needed. This is my
best-effort attempt to summarize the various points raised in the last
ML[2] discussion about this.

1.  aafe9fbaf4 ("Add config option to enable 'fsync()' of object
    files", 2008-06-18)
2. https://lore.kernel.org/git/20180117184828.31816-1-hch@lst.de/ (local)

Signed-off-by: Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <redacted>
---
 Documentation/config/core.txt | 42 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----
 1 file changed, 36 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)

When I saw the subject in my mailbox, I expected to see that you
would resurrect Christoph's updated text in [*1*], but you wrote a
whole lot more ;-) And they are quite informative to help readers to
understand what the option does.  I am not sure if the understanding
directly help readers to decide if it is appropriate for their own
repositories, though X-<.

I agree that it is an improvement, and am therefore in favor of applying
the patch.

Ciao,
Dscho