Duy Nguyen <pclouds@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > On Sat, Jan 26, 2013 at 2:00 AM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> This is not a tangent, but if you want to go this "forbid making our >> repository depend on objects we do not have but we know about after >> we peek submodule odb" route [*1*], write_sha1_file() needs to be >> told about has_sha1_file_proper(). We may "git add" a new blob in >> the superproject, the blob may not yet exist in *our* repository, >> but may happen to already exist in the submodue odb. In such a >> case, write_sha1_file() has to write that blob in our repository, >> without the existing has_sha1_file() check bypassing it. Otherwise >> our attempt to create a tree that contains that blob will fail, >> saying that the blob only seems to exist to us via submodule odb but >> not in our repository. > > Another thing needs to be done for this to work. The current reading For *what* to work??? I think the performance consideration is the only thing that should drive the read-order; correctness should not be affected. > order is packs first, loose objects next. If we create a local loose > duplicate of an alternate packed object, our local version will never > be read. Regardless the submodule odb issue, I think we should prefer > reading local loose objects over alternate packed ones. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html