On Tue, Jan 18 2022, Derrick Stolee wrote: > On 1/12/2022 7:42 AM, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote: >> >> On Mon, Dec 20 2021, Derrick Stolee wrote: >> >>> On 12/20/2021 11:13 AM, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote: >>>> >>>> On Mon, Dec 20 2021, Derrick Stolee wrote: >>>> >>>>> On 12/12/2021 3:13 PM, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote: >>>>>> But we've also grown a hard dependency on this directory within git >>>>>> itself. Since 94c0956b609 (sparse-checkout: create builtin with 'list' >>>>>> subcommand, 2019-11-21) released with v2.25.0 the "git >>>>>> sparse-checkout" command has wanted to add exclusions to >>>>>> "info/sparse-checkout". It didn't check or create the leading >>>>>> directory, so if it's omitted the command will die. >>>>> >>>>>> Even if that behavior were fixed we'd be left with older versions of >>>>>> "git" dying if that was attempted if they used a repository >>>>>> initialized without a template. >>>>> >>>>> This, I don't understand. Why can't we add a >>>>> safe_create_leading_directories() to any place where we try to >>>>> create a sparse-checkout file? >>>>> >>>>> This would fix situations where older versions were init'd with a >>>>> different template or if the user deleted the info dir. The change >>>>> you've made here doesn't fix those cases, which is what you are >>>>> claiming is the reason to not do the other fix that seems like it >>>>> would. >>>>> >>>>> What am I misunderstanding here? >>>> >>>> I'll clarify that a bit in any re-roll. >>>> >>>> Pedantically nothing changes, i.e. you can create a repository with an >>>> empty template now, and it'll break on both the sparse-checkout on that >>>> version, and any previous version that had that un-noticed issue. >>> >>> You continue after this with more motivations for adding 'init' >>> unconditionally, which I am not fighting. >>> >>> What I _am_ saying is important is that if we are trying to write >>> a file to a known location and its parent directory doesn't exist, >>> then we should create it. Not doing so is a bug and should be >>> fixed, no matter how rare such a thing is to occur. As you've >>> shown, it is not required to have an info directory until we need >>> one (e.g. for sparse-checkout or an excludes file). >>> >>> If you're not planning to add that to this series, then I'll add it >>> to my list. I do think it would fit well into this one, though. >> >> Just so we'll avoid stepping on each other's toes, what's the status of >> your plan/non-plan to work on that more isolated fix, perhaps you have >> one that's unsubmitted? > > I do not have one that is unsubmitted. I was hoping that you would > include it in a v2 to this series. I might have been quicker to > volunteer to create one had I not been sidelined for two weeks, but > right now I have a lot to catch up on so don't have the time. Good to hear that you're better (or back?, not 100% sure what "sidelined" here means). I'll try to get to re-rolling it with a fix for that sparse-checkout issue, hopefully sooner than later. Just wanted to avoid potential duplicate work. Thanks.
