On Thu, Aug 29, 2019 at 04:31:34PM +0700, Duy Nguyen wrote: > > If so, how could we get R there? I mean, we could pass it through this > > chain, but the chain already passes a "struct config_options", which > > carries the "commondir" and "git_dir" fields. So it would probably be > > confusing to have them and an extra repository parameter (which also > > has "commondir" and "git_dir"), right? Any ideas on how to better > > approach this? > > I would change 'struct config_options' to carry 'struct repository' > which also contains git_dir and other info inside. Though I have no > idea how big that change would be (didn't check the code). Config code > relies on plenty callbacks without "void *cb_data" so relying on > global state is the only way in some cases. I'm not sure about that, at least for this particular git_pathdup(). We pass along the git_dir because we might not have a repository struct yet (i.e., when reading config before repo discovery has happened). So it might be that this case should actually be making a path out of $git_dir/config.worktree (but I'm not 100% sure, as I don't know the ins and outs of worktree config files). I'm sure there are other gotchas in the config code, though, related to things for which we _do_ need a repository. E.g., include_by_branch() looks at the_repository, and should use a repository struct matching the git_dir we're looking at (though it may be acceptable to bail during early pre-repo-initialization config and just disallow branch includes, which is what happens now). -Peff
