From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from fout-a5-smtp.messagingengine.com (fout-a5-smtp.messagingengine.com [103.168.172.148]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1533E2EBDD5 for ; Thu, 24 Jul 2025 18:44:15 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=103.168.172.148 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1753382661; cv=none; b=nrnyPk6sWaKICBQpJXwaapYAHBWbTAx9QVBNsP5sSUZC59aaGkBZ5ohpr17M06FqvSardVGNFb/UK6bPaRhAJURXW2bLA1npLkywP86AmzRtLJxx4f/WZ61PfQTDe5UiLOPeuwdkwTePKx58kV1mUFOtzJU3Fzi1XiKNpATCDHg= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1753382661; c=relaxed/simple; bh=eNFMjL0lndNxAEfvxSQLwMRp5oo1uddLp+A+KWXUt6c=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=ASfwyZcoMCS4NBNG/You+avtzTKeM7tApGvqDXp7fsGJOpryu3lEUr8shtQ+09X5q3G8JjhoYh/aKFEvYkigY3BjXDvUF5PjM/3J6giWxi54qxCQPdppUSrZL5tc4EAP6OBLKZN/boZK69rJGlXy4wTDJ5/AogJA6ZlkK1MPs2I= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=pobox.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=pobox.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=pobox.com header.i=@pobox.com header.b=ZMGUnHXE; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.i=@messagingengine.com header.b=LYkmOty5; arc=none smtp.client-ip=103.168.172.148 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=pobox.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=pobox.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=pobox.com header.i=@pobox.com header.b="ZMGUnHXE"; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.i=@messagingengine.com header.b="LYkmOty5" Received: from phl-compute-04.internal (phl-compute-04.phl.internal [10.202.2.44]) by mailfout.phl.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3DFA2EC01AF; Thu, 24 Jul 2025 14:44:15 -0400 (EDT) Received: from phl-frontend-02 ([10.202.2.161]) by phl-compute-04.internal (MEProxy); Thu, 24 Jul 2025 14:44:15 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=cc :cc:content-type:content-type:date:date:from:from:in-reply-to :in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references:reply-to:subject :subject:to:to; s=fm1; t=1753382655; x=1753469055; bh=5WZnu9FCer 8PWUJIwAVjl89bhn/sytPLoIPREUszWV0=; b=ZMGUnHXEmBZUC2Tjmyc0QGu2X2 czYHQg4LHM/LmZJ+dxlQquu+BY1rpa/v68ht72VpV05Yqw8eaGc52zviAzwalmVW Qe/2Av4sf88Ff3V8O42D8+3oDEMYrsIavLxUA4Sgkm3MOcLmM287pHLSgLhSYiut qHYlBcKk1aCnRSO7tAkzneXdT9LvBS545ACdqhe6er6BATJQsRg4ph2iKzRaOOT+ BO7nC3aZ0PrOd+JxNOkO08njfxAGS9Rireegf+kiXqTZI9rkTqbROIHEWHqEcxlO ZAVYqGt8eyVHfNAXA5kSzQcGnCdK/1nHjc0MIg/QCohM9TnwXMIXgtk3pR8A== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:cc:content-type:content-type:date:date :feedback-id:feedback-id:from:from:in-reply-to:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:reply-to:subject:subject:to :to:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; t= 1753382655; x=1753469055; bh=5WZnu9FCer8PWUJIwAVjl89bhn/sytPLoIP REUszWV0=; b=LYkmOty5ZbFrs3B5aanGfMDPsGinJSDc5tWRE+DvrJmhQ3btJjK hitOOlfgMGI4mGI/CVUhy1UrF5UAYdGzWSzl2bgFh3sSIa1X9ilv0dg7MPHX4/L6 l+UjffJjFwdG+VIqyISZVn9UN09tzK2DhF3lb1Qm8aZqoR3JlrdqaRq4vrltr41y ocgZPjPptng6TWQE748ZvaASYJaFSIDuOZST3XsdhSYimdbKuL6ec0/PA9cpZkOE ZDuHm9HjYyJMR7WiX660BuZI03Zbsb3WXNVPkeFwl8HQ0QcIvwGOPgAEyQjSKE4r lqukU5ObCA4JQ/KTAhRngKM/H6tXUe6vLdA== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Received: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeeffedrtdefgdekudeflecutefuodetggdotefrod ftvfcurfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfghnecuuegr ihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmdenucfjug hrpefhvfevufgjfhffkfgfgggtsehttdertddtredtnecuhfhrohhmpefluhhnihhoucev ucfjrghmrghnohcuoehgihhtshhtvghrsehpohgsohigrdgtohhmqeenucggtffrrghtth gvrhhnpeefveetteejheeugeffledvteeiveffueefjeelueffteeigffgfedthfefieeg ieenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedtnecurfgrrhgrmhepmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpehgih htshhtvghrsehpohgsohigrdgtohhmpdhnsggprhgtphhtthhopeelpdhmohguvgepshhm thhpohhuthdprhgtphhtthhopehsthholhgvvgesghhmrghilhdrtghomhdprhgtphhtth hopegrhihurdgthhgrnhguvghkrghrsehgmhgrihhlrdgtohhmpdhrtghpthhtoheptghh rhhishhtihgrnhdrtghouhguvghrsehgmhgrihhlrdgtohhmpdhrtghpthhtohepghhith esvhhgvghrrdhkvghrnhgvlhdrohhrghdprhgtphhtthhopehshhihrghmthhhrghkkhgr rhdttddusehgmhgrihhlrdgtohhmpdhrtghpthhtohepphhhihhllhhiphdrfihoohguud dvfeesghhmrghilhdrtghomhdprhgtphhtthhopehpshesphhkshdrihhmpdhrtghpthht ohepsggvnhdrkhhnohgslhgvsehgmhgrihhlrdgtohhmpdhrtghpthhtohepghhithhsth gvrhesphhosghogidrtghomh X-ME-Proxy: Feedback-ID: if26b431b:Fastmail Received: by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Thu, 24 Jul 2025 14:44:14 -0400 (EDT) From: Junio C Hamano To: Derrick Stolee Cc: Ayush Chandekar , christian.couder@gmail.com, git@vger.kernel.org, shyamthakkar001@gmail.com, phillip.wood123@gmail.com, ps@pks.im, ben.knoble@gmail.com Subject: Re: [GSOC PATCH v6 0/3] environment: remove sparse-checkout related global variables In-Reply-To: <43aaec10-2696-44c9-8728-2045b83dc5d3@gmail.com> (Derrick Stolee's message of "Thu, 24 Jul 2025 09:25:34 -0400") References: <20250603131806.14915-1-ayu.chandekar@gmail.com> <43aaec10-2696-44c9-8728-2045b83dc5d3@gmail.com> Date: Thu, 24 Jul 2025 11:44:13 -0700 Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Derrick Stolee writes: > There are two ways to change the approach here to fix the problem > of needing prepare_repo_settings() everyhwere: > > 1. With the idea that these sparse-checkout variables are > critical to the functionality of the repo, they should move > into the repository struct itself and be initialized along > with all other values there. This changes the patches (and my > follow-up series) significantly, but mechanically. > > 2. If we are going to change the intention of the repo settings > struct to move from "optional one-off feature flags" to > "important information about the core behavior of a repo" > then we should prepare_repo_settings() when initializing the > repository struct. > > My preference is (1). The only argument for (2) that I can think > of is that it is sometimes helpful to share only the settings for > a repo without sharing the whole repo. But that seems like a weak > reason right now. I do agree with the sentiment that being able to pass &repo.settings to helper function makes us feel safer, but I agree that it is a weak argument. If we reexamine other things in repo_settings, it may turn out that the same reasoning applies to them and we may be better off to roll repo_settings into the repository itself (after all, it is an embedded structure, not even a pointer in the main structure that points at an indenendent repo_settings structure), but that is totally outside the scope of this discussion. Thanks.