Re: [PATCH 2/2] doc/git-repack: don't mention nonexistent "--unpacked" option

[Taylor Blau <me@ttaylorr.com>]

On Mon, Oct 16, 2023 at 09:19:56AM +0200, Patrick Steinhardt wrote:
> The documentation for geometric repacking mentions a "--unpacked" option
> that supposedly changes how loose objects are rolled up. This option has
> never existed, and the implied behaviour, namely to include all unpacked
> objects into the resulting packfile, is in fact the default behaviour.
>
> Correct the documentation to not mention this option.
>
> Signed-off-by: Patrick Steinhardt <ps@pks.im>
> ---
>  Documentation/git-repack.txt | 7 ++-----
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/Documentation/git-repack.txt b/Documentation/git-repack.txt
> index dfd2a59c50..d61078b697 100644
> --- a/Documentation/git-repack.txt
> +++ b/Documentation/git-repack.txt
> @@ -226,11 +226,8 @@ uniquely by the set of packs being "rolled-up"; in other words, the
>  packs determined to need to be combined in order to restore a geometric
>  progression.
>  +
> -When `--unpacked` is specified, loose objects are implicitly included in
> -this "roll-up", without respect to their reachability. This is subject
> -to change in the future. This option (implying a drastically different
> -repack mode) is not guaranteed to work with all other combinations of
> -option to `git repack`.
> +Loose objects are implicitly included in this "roll-up", without respect to
> +their reachability. This is subject to change in the future.
>  +

Oops. This refers to the "--unpacked" option that pack-objects takes,
not repack. I agree that mentioning "--unpacked" is too low-level a
detail for this user-facing documentation, so even something like:

    When `repack` passes `--unpacked` down to `pack-objects` (which is
    the default) ...

would be too much detail for this man page.

I am very happy with the patch here as an alternative.

Thanks,
Taylor