Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] tmp-objdir: new API for creating temporary writable databases

Neeraj Singh [off-list ref] writes:

quoted

quoted

+	if (tmp_objdir)
+		tmp_objdir_reapply_primary_odb(tmp_objdir, old_cwd, new_cwd);
 	free(path);
 }

This is called during set_git_dir(), which happens fairly early in
the set-up sequence.  I wonder if there is a real use case that
creates a tmp-objdir that early in the process to require this
unapply-reapply sequence.

The lack of this code was causing a failure, I believe in
t2107-update-index-basic.sh: "--refresh triggers late setup_work_tree".

This problem came up after applying: https://lore.kernel.org/git/4a40fd4a29a468b9ce320bc7b22f19e5a526fad6.1637020263.git.gitgitgadget@gmail.com/ (local)

I thought it would be best to fix this in the tmp-objdir code so that
callers could plug/unplug bulk checkin without any subtle surprises.

OK, I think that is fine.

As a slightly-related tangent that is outside the topic, I think we
should revisit "update-index", which is one of the oldest plumbing
commands with its own quirks.  I do not offhand see why it needs to
sprinkle this many setup_work_tree() calls everywhere.  Having an
index to work on means we must have a working tree to update and/or
refresh from.  We should be able to get away with the NEED_WORK_TREE
bit in the git.c::commands[] table for this command.  If this were a
more recent command, I may suspect that there were valid reasons
like "in this particular mode, update-index must work inside a bare
repository" to force us to take this unusual program structure, but
because this is probably a lot older than NEED_WORK_TREE bit, I
would not be surprised if the answer were "nobody noticed the
ugliness so far".

Given that this patch series introduces functions with no users, are you
going to hold off on putting this into 'next' until another next-worthy
patch series is ready?

Even without any existing callers, as long as we see Reviewed-by: by
Elijah, who we know will have to build on top of this series, I
think this can and should go to 'next'.

Thanks.