On Mon, Jul 18 2022, SZEDER Gábor wrote: > The first section of 'Documentation/technical/index-format.txt' > mentions that "Git currently supports cache tree and resolve undo > extensions", but then goes on, and in the "Extensions" section > describes not only these two, but six other extensions [1]. > > Remove this sentence, as it's misleading about the status of all those > other extensions. > > Alternatively we could keep that sentence and update the list of > extensions, but that might well lead to a recurring issue, because > apparently this list is never updated when a new index extension is > added. > > [1] Split index, untracked cache, FS monitor cache, end of index > entry, index entry offset table and sparse directory entries. > > Signed-off-by: SZEDER Gábor <szeder.dev@xxxxxxxxx> > --- > Documentation/technical/index-format.txt | 2 -- > 1 file changed, 2 deletions(-) Note that there's a conflict with my series to move this to gitformat-index(5), although the conflict is easily solved: https://lore.kernel.org/git/patch-v4-6.8-858ce9c6999-20220718T132911Z-avarab@xxxxxxxxx/ > diff --git a/Documentation/technical/index-format.txt b/Documentation/technical/index-format.txt > index 65da0daaa5..f691c20ab0 100644 > --- a/Documentation/technical/index-format.txt > +++ b/Documentation/technical/index-format.txt > @@ -26,8 +26,6 @@ Git index format > Extensions are identified by signature. Optional extensions can > be ignored if Git does not understand them. > > - Git currently supports cache tree and resolve undo extensions. > - > 4-byte extension signature. If the first byte is 'A'..'Z' the > extension is optional and can be ignored. I wonder if we should instead say : git currently supports various index extensions, see <asciidoc syntax to link to section below>.
