> what about the comparison code where is_bare_repository_cfg is
> compared with 1 (it is a boolean and sometimes set to -1). This
> would not generally pass a code review.
I'm sorry, I'm afraid I don't completely follow. Wouldn't the most
straightforward change be to simply follow the documented
recommendation when we create the worktree config in `git
sparse-checkout init`? Specifically,
@@ -374,6 +374,9 @@ static int set_config(enum sparse_checkout_mode mode)
"core.sparseCheckoutCone",
mode == MODE_CONE_PATTERNS ? "true" : NULL);
+ if (is_bare_repository())
+ git_config_set_in_file_gently(config_path, "core.bare", "false");
+
if (mode == MODE_NO_PATTERNS)
set_sparse_index_config(the_repository, 0);
Are we saying the comparison within is_bare_repository() may not be
appropriate in this case?
---
Or maybe it makes more sense to call set_git_work_tree() somewhere
sensible such that get_git_work_tree() will return non-null. Doing a
deeper dive into the code, that might be the *real* root cause
(assuming the_repository->worktree is NULL in this scenario; I have
not run git through a debugger). Such a change could have
farther-reaching consequences, though.
