Re: [PATCH 0/1] Preserve the untracked cache across checkout, reset --hard, etc

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 




On 5/9/2017 1:02 AM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
David Turner <David.Turner@xxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:

Can you actually keep the email address as my Twopensource one?  I want to make sure that Twitter, my employer at the time, gets credit for this work (just as I want to make sure that my current employer, Two Sigma, gets credit for my current work).

Please feel free to add Signed-off-by: David Turner <dturner@xxxxxxxxxxxx> in case that makes tracking easier.

Thanks.

WRT the actual patch, I want to note that past me did not do a
great job here.  The tests do not correctly check that the
post-checkout untracked cache is still valid after a checkout.
For example, let's say that previously, the directory foo was
entirely untracked (but it contained a file bar), but after the
checkout, there is a file foo/baz.  Does the untracked cache need
to get updated?

Unfortunately, the untracked cache is very unlikely to make it to
the top of my priority list any time soon, so I won't be able to
correct this test (and, if necessary, correct the code).  But I
would strongly suggest that the test be improved before this code
is merged.

Thanks for CCing me.
I will try to find time to tweak what was sent to the list here to
reflect your affiliations better, but marked with DONTMERGE waiting
for the necessary updates you mentioned above, so that this change
is not forgotten.  It may turn out to be that copying from src to
dst like the patch does is all that is needed, or the cache may need
further invalidation when the copying happens, and I haven't got a
good feeling that anybody who are familiar with the codepath vetted
the correctness from seeing the discussion from sidelines (yet).

Thanks.

I've been looking into similar issues with the cache associated with using a file system monitor (aka Watchman) (https://github.com/git-for-windows/git/compare/master...benpeart:fsmonitor) to speed updating the index to reflect changes in the working directory.

I can take a look and see if this patch results in valid results and reply to the thread or resubmit as needed.

Ben



[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Gcc Help]     [IETF Annouce]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Networking]     [Security]     [V4L]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Fedora Users]