From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=ttaylorr-com.20230601.gappssmtp.com header.i=@ttaylorr-com.20230601.gappssmtp.com header.b="R4LepSzC" Received: from mail-qt1-x831.google.com (mail-qt1-x831.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::831]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 23D2ED40 for ; Thu, 30 Nov 2023 11:29:55 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-qt1-x831.google.com with SMTP id d75a77b69052e-423c28db22eso20218831cf.1 for ; Thu, 30 Nov 2023 11:29:55 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ttaylorr-com.20230601.gappssmtp.com; s=20230601; t=1701372594; x=1701977394; darn=vger.kernel.org; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=EYA3YOToX17fxExUhQ4IK/EQF+H4lmHO1Qhq/hGUFT4=; b=R4LepSzCuUr0oD6Iue27anM2c1uVrcrvImxHsBohjazBN6GxtC/bhvsXH/nxA1h932 VtAMitldLq90FslOGw4MjcqxDQ2EWU0iqu+mSS8e4nDfMGb42lbEQQG1wLhnHnkeXuEV aWSYSFDPKPtT9KR6xHGT83hqptdaq+qRLgerHq6AaZGA1OMlLjwaZ+00ZkPVLnwaCnuA CzNIs1NEZBNzhfvhsc7vRH7KFGwBHetDjTUSzeZKNckgeH1fJ054g/L7YC2FF1tvOhSD I4ccDeHsfeCOdZD0wsPiQ3gdePYhFRg3biSsw6RKsnMHW96Vuye55811c2YRuWy3nZti Fo/w== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1701372594; x=1701977394; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=EYA3YOToX17fxExUhQ4IK/EQF+H4lmHO1Qhq/hGUFT4=; b=tLYfsAujHb2PFgcUahYyvL3yN6zxrh+osh6HFWABOvV1u53o3LdVXN2gl1ldsPu6ur 0zvuIynIGSrHfTsNU/0dXHqhSra6BQKwPG7ew6fnY7Q0lxljvSMNccB6GmciEYNGZtU3 BXMLRgvvea/4RQ+qmSg9i2xevTfOk6dvhY64EmHT/Qo68978E9hT/bGA7ibeXjb4xB4I hgvRiJ0VTilJoC4AqizVgk/VPnyw+N/lB5Hq4a0eDSbVkbUTnJVFyEm0dQvpZFH+7vfS BJCgcj1KtgEQ/Ed8HTssgSTCWg6N+lN7Xu18TR+pdH2MJr4yasHjo4N3105AOivQdXRQ Gu9Q== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YwswT+hGQkmlMrB8qjwgBG6ChbU7SZoFUQAkKZQNs7niVuQAo4F Q3ZqcNAbm3A89rgjIxYv+eWzhQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IFgEYdTWGPrZREXFdTRo8wOc7DXbVtSoY/doG2gglJwS5r/k2WSMhZ3il2rlNoJ6zi86rpzjw== X-Received: by 2002:a05:622a:54e:b0:412:3d25:9019 with SMTP id m14-20020a05622a054e00b004123d259019mr33473350qtx.6.1701372594225; Thu, 30 Nov 2023 11:29:54 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (104-178-186-189.lightspeed.milwwi.sbcglobal.net. [104.178.186.189]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id br5-20020a05622a1e0500b004240481cee0sm50159qtb.58.2023.11.30.11.29.53 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Thu, 30 Nov 2023 11:29:53 -0800 (PST) Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2023 14:29:52 -0500 From: Taylor Blau To: Patrick Steinhardt Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, Jeff King , Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: [PATCH 07/24] midx: implement `--retain-disjoint` mode Message-ID: References: <3019738b52ba8cd78ea696a3b800fa91e722eb66.1701198172.git.me@ttaylorr.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: On Thu, Nov 30, 2023 at 11:18:51AM +0100, Patrick Steinhardt wrote: > > diff --git a/Documentation/git-multi-pack-index.txt b/Documentation/git-multi-pack-index.txt > > index d130e65b28..ac0c7b124b 100644 > > --- a/Documentation/git-multi-pack-index.txt > > +++ b/Documentation/git-multi-pack-index.txt > > @@ -54,6 +54,14 @@ write:: > > "disjoint". See the "`DISP` chunk and disjoint packs" > > section in linkgit:gitformat-pack[5] for more. > > > > + --retain-disjoint:: > > + When writing a multi-pack index with a reachability > > + bitmap, keep any packs marked as disjoint in the > > + existing MIDX (if any) as such in the new MIDX. Existing > > + disjoint packs which are removed (e.g., not listed via > > + `--stdin-packs`) are ignored. This option works in > > + addition to the '+' marker for `--stdin-packs`. > > I'm trying to understand when you're expected to pass this flag and when > you're expected not to pass it. This documentation could also help in > the documentation here so that the user can make a more informed > decision. I think there are multiple reasons that you may or may not want to pass that flag. Certainly if you're not using disjoint packs (and instead only care about single-pack verbatim reuse over the MIDX's preferred packfile), then you don't need to pass it. But if you are using disjoint packs, you may want to pass it if you are adding packs to the MIDX which are disjoint, _and_ you want to hold onto the existing set of disjoint packs. But if you want to change the set of disjoint packs entirely, you would want to omit this flag (unless you knew a-priori that you were going to drop all of the currently marked disjoint packs from the new MIDX you are writing, e.g. with --stdin-packs). If you think it would be useful, I could try and distill some of this down, but I think that there is likely too much detail here for it to be useful in user-facing documentation. Thanks, Taylor