On Sat, Dec 31, 2016 at 6:32 PM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx> writes: > >> On Sat, Dec 31, 2016 at 04:12:40AM +0100, Michael Haggerty wrote: >> >>> This is a re-roll of an old patch series. v1 [1] got some feedback, >>> which I think was all addressed in v2 [2]. But it seems that v2 fell >>> on the floor, and I didn't bother following up because it was in the >>> same area of code that was undergoing heavy changes due to the >>> pluggable reference backend work. Sorry for the long delay before >>> getting back to it. >> >> I've read through the whole thing, and aside from a few very minor nits >> (that I am not even sure are worth a re-roll), I didn't see anything >> wrong. And the overall goal and approach seem obviously sound. >> >>> Michael Haggerty (23): >> >> I'll admit to being daunted by the number of patches, but it was quite a >> pleasant and easy read. Thanks. >> >> -Peff > > Thanks, both. These patches indeed were pleasant. I do have one comment regarding this series. Is it ever possible for an older version of git to be running a process while a new version of git which cleans up dirs runs? Is this expected? I just want to make sure we don't need to worry about that scenario since otherwise it makes it much more challenge. My thought as far as I understand it is that it is possible, because a user COULD choose to run both this and an older version, but that it is unlikely in practice outside of a few developer boxes who periodically switch between versions of git, and are unlikely to actually run multiple versions at exactly the same time. Thanks, Jake