Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > Atharva Raykar <raykar.ath@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > >> This is needed so that it can be modified by normalize_path_copy() in >> the next patch. > > This is a hard-to-judge change. With this alone, we cannot tell if > somebody has already looked at the member (and possibly saved the > pointer elsewhere) before "the next patch" starts modifying the > member in the struct. It probably should be done in a single patch > to demonstrate why it is needed and how existing users of the field > are OK with this change. Okay, I will move this to the next patch.
