From: Patrick Steinhardt <ps@pks.im>
To: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Cc: Karthik Nayak <karthik.188@gmail.com>,
Han Young <hanyang.tony@bytedance.com>,
git@vger.kernel.org, Han Young <hanyoung@protonmail.com>,
Sigma <git@sigma-star.io>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] files-backend: check symref name before update
Date: Thu, 2 Oct 2025 17:30:32 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <aN6amIG2Sp3W500K@pks.im> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <xmqqo6qpxw6w.fsf@gitster.g>
On Thu, Oct 02, 2025 at 06:36:07AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Patrick Steinhardt <ps@pks.im> writes:
> > Agreed! Overall, the goal is that all logic to verify references should
> > be contained in `git refs verify`, so that git-fsck(1) only needs to
> > shell out to that command to perform the full check.
> >
> > So if this logic isn't yet part of `git refs verify`, we should migrate
> > it over.
>
> Absolutely. As "git refs verify" is a way to do the sanity check of
> the ref part (presumably without incurring cost to sanity check
> other aspect, like fsck does? why is it a separate command in the
> first place?), it should learn how to do so.
We have the same pattern in other command:
- git commit-graph verify
- git multi-pack-index verify
- git bundle verify
So `git refs verify` is following the same direction.
I think it's a nice pattern to have this encapsulated functionality so
that it's easy to exercise certain subsystems in isolation. git-fsck(1)
then becomes a thin wrapper around these commands and is the one that
ties it all together, if desired.
> "git fsck" should keep complaining about the failure as before,
> whether it is done natively or by delegating to "git refs verify".
Yup.
Patrick
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-10-02 15:30 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-10-01 15:08 [PATCH 0/1] files-backend: check symref name before update Han Young
2025-10-01 15:08 ` [PATCH 1/1] " Han Young
2025-10-01 19:22 ` Junio C Hamano
2025-10-02 9:54 ` Karthik Nayak
2025-10-02 11:47 ` Patrick Steinhardt
2025-10-02 13:36 ` Junio C Hamano
2025-10-02 15:30 ` Patrick Steinhardt [this message]
2025-10-02 17:34 ` Junio C Hamano
2025-10-05 8:19 ` shejialuo
2025-10-02 9:34 ` [PATCH 0/1] " Karthik Nayak
2025-10-02 14:45 ` Junio C Hamano
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=aN6amIG2Sp3W500K@pks.im \
--to=ps@pks.im \
--cc=git@sigma-star.io \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=gitster@pobox.com \
--cc=hanyang.tony@bytedance.com \
--cc=hanyoung@protonmail.com \
--cc=karthik.188@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).