On Fri, Sep 06, 2013 at 07:46:01AM +0700, Nguyen Thai Ngoc Duy wrote: > --- > I had something that could unpack without writing to temp pack file > but I scraped it and chose this way because it follows closely how > index-pack works. It's a good thing imo because .pack v4 is coming > and I don't know how v4 may impact this unpack code path. Once things > are settled, we can revisit and open a separate code path if it's > still a good idea. >From a cursory read, this seems fine. If it were done in complete isolation, I'd say it was a slight regression, just because we are doing more I/O for the unpack case, and it is not really saving us any code (it is not like we can throw away unpack-objects, as I think we would want to keep it as a last resort for getting data out of malformed or otherwise non-indexable packs). But I can also see it making pack v4 handling easier. So it would make sense to me to put it at the start of a series adding pack v4 indexing. By the end of the series you would be able to see the benefits of the reduced code complexity. Until then, it is a "probably this will help later" change. -Peff -- 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