From: Jens Lehmann <Jens.Lehmann@web.de>
To: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Cc: "Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy" <pclouds@gmail.com>,
git@vger.kernel.org, "Heiko Voigt" <hvoigt@hvoigt.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH/RFC] Revoke write access to refs and odb after importing another repo's odb
Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2013 21:38:15 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <51004A37.6040301@web.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <7v1udbj0kt.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>
Am 23.01.2013 18:01, schrieb Junio C Hamano:
> Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy <pclouds@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> add_submodule_odb() can be used to import objects from another
>> repository temporarily. After this point we don't know which objects
>> are ours, which are external. If we create an object that refers to an
>> external object, next time git runs, it may find a hole in the object
>> graph because the external repository may not be imported. The same
>> goes for pointing a ref to an external SHA-1.
>>
>> To protect ourselves, once add_submodule_odb() is used:
>>
>> - trees, tags and commits cannot be created
>> - refs cannot be updated
>>
>> In certain cases that submodule code knows that it's safe to write, it
>> can turn the readonly flag off.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy <pclouds@gmail.com>
>> ---
>> I think this is a good safety check.
>
> Two step implementation to bring "read-only" support into a testable
> shape and then flip that bit in add_submdule_odb() would be a
> sensible approach.
I agree this is a worthwhile change so nobody accidentally screws
things up.
>> It catches at least a case in
>> t7405.3. I did not investigate further though.
This is a false positive. The merge algorithm picked a fast-forward
in a submodule as a proper merge result and records that in a
gitlink. But as Duy pointed out this could be easily fixed by
turning the readonly flag off in that case.
> I however have this suspicion that this will become a losing battle
> and we would be better off getting rid of add_submodule_odb();
> instead operations that work across repositories will be done as a
> subprocess, which will get us back closer to one of the original
> design goals of submodule support to have a clear separation between
> the superproject and its submodules.
Please don't. While I agree with your goal, I'd be unhappy to do
that because of the performance drop (especially on fork-challenged
operating systems).
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-01-23 20:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-01-23 13:34 [PATCH/RFC] Revoke write access to refs and odb after importing another repo's odb Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy
2013-01-23 13:38 ` Duy Nguyen
2013-01-23 17:01 ` Junio C Hamano
2013-01-23 20:38 ` Jens Lehmann [this message]
2013-01-23 21:06 ` Junio C Hamano
2013-01-24 5:58 ` Duy Nguyen
2013-01-24 1:30 ` Duy Nguyen
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=51004A37.6040301@web.de \
--to=jens.lehmann@web.de \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=gitster@pobox.com \
--cc=hvoigt@hvoigt.net \
--cc=pclouds@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).