"Derrick Stolee via GitGitGadget" <gitgitgadget@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
> - N_("git commit-graph write [--object-dir <objdir>] [--append] [--reachable|--stdin-packs|--stdin-commits]"),
> + N_("git commit-graph write [--object-dir <objdir>] [--append|--split] [--reachable|--stdin-packs|--stdin-commits]"),
Not a comment on the essential part of this feature, but are append
and split meant to be mutually exclusive?
One thing that is somewhat curious is that this commit itself does
not do much that would affect the correctness of how GRAPH_SPLIT
works, as the actual machinery was introduced in the previous step
and this step merely makes it accessible from the outside. So I had
to look at the previous step to see if the internal machinery had
some safety valve to catch the combination and flag it as an error
or something like that, but if I am not mistaken, there is nothing
that prevents both from being specified.
> @@ -156,6 +156,8 @@ static int graph_write(int argc, const char **argv)
> N_("start walk at commits listed by stdin")),
> OPT_BOOL(0, "append", &opts.append,
> N_("include all commits already in the commit-graph file")),
> + OPT_BOOL(0, "split", &opts.split,
> + N_("allow writing an incremental commit-graph file")),
> OPT_END(),
> };
>
> @@ -169,6 +171,8 @@ static int graph_write(int argc, const char **argv)
> opts.obj_dir = get_object_directory();
> if (opts.append)
> flags |= COMMIT_GRAPH_APPEND;
> + if (opts.split)
> + flags |= COMMIT_GRAPH_SPLIT;
