"Derrick Stolee via GitGitGadget" [off-list ref] writes:
From: Derrick Stolee <redacted>
Several methods specify that they take a 'struct index_state' pointer
with the 'const' qualifier because they intend to only query the data,
not change it. However, we will be introducing a step very low in the
method stack that might modify a sparse-index to become a full index in
the case that our queries venture inside a sparse-directory entry.
This change only removes the 'const' qualifiers that are necessary for
the following change which will actually modify the implementation of
index_name_stage_pos().
This step has a bit of interaction with Matheus's "git add/rm" work
in sparse checkout (mt/add-rm-in-sparse-checkout), which I believe
is still in a bit of flux. I didn't check potential conflicts the
remainder of the series may have with other in-flight topics.
So, I may throw review comments at the patches in this topic as if
they are standalone, but please do not be upset if it didn't appear
in the 'seen' topic.
Thanks.
On 3/19/2021 5:01 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
"Derrick Stolee via GitGitGadget" [off-list ref] writes:
quoted
From: Derrick Stolee <redacted>
Several methods specify that they take a 'struct index_state' pointer
with the 'const' qualifier because they intend to only query the data,
not change it. However, we will be introducing a step very low in the
method stack that might modify a sparse-index to become a full index in
the case that our queries venture inside a sparse-directory entry.
This change only removes the 'const' qualifiers that are necessary for
the following change which will actually modify the implementation of
index_name_stage_pos().
This step has a bit of interaction with Matheus's "git add/rm" work
in sparse checkout (mt/add-rm-in-sparse-checkout), which I believe
is still in a bit of flux. I didn't check potential conflicts the
remainder of the series may have with other in-flight topics.
So, I may throw review comments at the patches in this topic as if
they are standalone, but please do not be upset if it didn't appear
in the 'seen' topic.
Thanks for the point. I need to reset my expectations about how
much I am stomping on other topics in flight. I rarely work so
widely across the source tree.
I could split this patch out on its own so it can fit into a
narrow window between other topics that might collide with it,
then rebase the rest of the series on top after things settle.
Thanks,
-Stolee