Re: What's cooking in git.git (Nov 2008, #06; Wed, 26)

["Nguyen Thai Ngoc Duy" <pclouds@gmail.com>]

On 11/29/08, Nguyen Thai Ngoc Duy <pclouds@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 11/29/08, Daniel Barkalow <barkalow@iabervon.org> wrote:
>  >  If there's any need for this to be distinguished from "assume unchanged",
>  >  I think it should be used with, not instead of, the CE_VALID bit; and it
>  >  could probably use some bit in the stat info section, since we don't need
>  >  stat info if we know by assumption that the entry is valid.
>
>
> Interesting. I'll think more about this.
>

As I said, CE_VALID implies all files are present. I could make
CE_NO_CHECKOUT to be used with CE_VALID, but I would need to check all
CE_VALID code path to make sure the behaviour remains if
CE_NO_CHECKOUT is absent. It's just more intrusive.

I have nothing against storing CE_NO_CHECKOUT in stat info except that
it seems inappropriate/hidden place to do. ce_flags is more obvious
choice. I haven't looked closely to stat info code in read-cache.c
though.
-- 
Duy