From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: What's cooking in git.git (Dec 2011, #02; Mon, 5) Date: Tue, 06 Dec 2011 11:10:37 -0800 Message-ID: <7vd3c1h5xu.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> References: <7v8vmqi98f.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: git@vger.kernel.org To: Nguyen Thai Ngoc Duy X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Tue Dec 06 20:10:47 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1RY0Pf-0004Hn-7O for gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org; Tue, 06 Dec 2011 20:10:47 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753100Ab1LFTKm (ORCPT ); Tue, 6 Dec 2011 14:10:42 -0500 Received: from b-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com ([208.72.237.35]:55023 "EHLO smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752930Ab1LFTKk (ORCPT ); Tue, 6 Dec 2011 14:10:40 -0500 Received: from smtp.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by b-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E9D415B48; Tue, 6 Dec 2011 14:10:39 -0500 (EST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=87ZYzwQqgAL+r8fGS640eiffDr0=; b=dBQBlx VOksR5ltLodMoJIeEUlH14hyOUlTL3q3IK8OE2QzDCvPEVILojA107hlfaHpWDt6 6FQDALLgPBNVV383x4zyS1UT+LHs27q3eWc1WykkgTNGpOzP94NrNIgjcUGwh5kf Vtg1A0w9NZFzNp0nLmshdUKKGQF4/Ky8lS3Vg= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; q=dns; s=sasl; b=ee2BQeyzdkXcyoQNH6Z8wOymCPiVR1yg zR815zNdY/DW9z6xeLGK4vDjuQW5o7pyhtZwl+7AU6NTBb8uGUT+ejmH6X90kXSI iPZWbi/shjtDCbqDhITjbBHtJi5be9fljDiBuzr/CPqt+/VtdgKEBCn46ZLXj+Fy LIAIjuj2PIs= Received: from b-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by b-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E17BE5B47; Tue, 6 Dec 2011 14:10:39 -0500 (EST) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [76.102.170.102]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by b-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 74FB65B45; Tue, 6 Dec 2011 14:10:39 -0500 (EST) In-Reply-To: (Nguyen Thai Ngoc Duy's message of "Tue, 6 Dec 2011 18:20:00 +0700") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.2 (gnu/linux) X-Pobox-Relay-ID: FC3EE03A-203D-11E1-A371-9DB42E706CDE-77302942!b-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Nguyen Thai Ngoc Duy writes: > What can I do to get "build in repack" [1] series in or moved forward? Resubmit to re-ignite interest in reviews, perhaps? As long as it is done right at the implementation level, I do not think there is anything controversial in the desired end result, iow it is not like we need three people who want to have repack rewritten in C for it to happen. It may be tricky to get the flushing of old and new packfiles right, though. Use of reprepare_packed_git() is prerequisite if you want to do it in a single process, but once you start using that API, it may not gain much performance benefit to link the whole pack-objects logic in to the process over a much simpler and less error prone approach of just rewriting the shell script straight to a small C program that spawns pack-objects binary.