Re: [PATCH v2] remote.c: defer remote.<name>.followRemoteHEAD validation

[Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>]

Colin Hinton <colinlewishinton@gmail.com> writes:

>> This part of the code becomes overly deeply indented, and more
>> importantly, the outer conditional around here has been reworked by
>> another topic and the code that learns follow_remote_head will have
>> to be reused elsewhere, which would lead to a nasty merge conflict.
>>
>> I'd like to see this part refactored into a separate helper
>> function, by squashing something like this on top of this patch.
>>
>> Thanks.
>
> Okay, I will refactor this into a helper method since yes the
> intending is becoming too much, I will also keep my eye on the patch
> you previously mentioned, and post a new version once Next has been
> updated from Harald's work so I can rebase with their fixes. Thanks
> for the feedback.
>
> -Colin Hinton

The 'ch/remote-defer-follow-remote-head-validation' branch at
https://github.com/gitster/git/ has a change on top that you can use
as a reference.  If you are going to make this a two-patch series, it
may make sense to first extract the code commented with "See
remote.c's handling of ..." into a helper function, and then extend
it to cover the lazy behavior in the second patch.  When viewed
that way, the helper function should not be named with a 'lazy_'
prefix as I mistakenly did.  Being lazy is not its purpose.  Its
point is to determine which setting of followRemoteHEAD is to be
used, and the helper function should be named after that concept.

Thanks.