Patrick Steinhardt <ps@xxxxxx> writes:
> The `run_auto_maintenance()` function is responsible for spawning a new
> `git maintenance run --auto` process. To do so, it sets up the `sturct
> child_process` and then runs it by executing `run_command()` directly.
> This is rather inflexible in case callers want to modify the child
> process somewhat, e.g. to redirect stderr or stdout.
>
> Introduce a new `prepare_auto_maintenance()` function to plug this gap.
I guess the mention of "inflexible" and "redirection" above refers
to some incompatibile behaviour we would introduce if we just
replaced the manual spawning of "gc --auto" with a call to
run_auto_maintenance(), but I would have expected that will be
solved by making the interface to run_auto_maintenance() richer, not
forcing the callers that would want to deviate from the norm to
write the second half of the run_auto_maintenance() themselves.
> +int run_auto_maintenance(int quiet)
> +{
> + struct child_process maint = CHILD_PROCESS_INIT;
> + if (!prepare_auto_maintenance(quiet, &maint))
> + return 0;
> return run_command(&maint);
> }
But given that the "second half" is to just call run_command() on
the prepared child control structure, it is probably not a huge
deal. It just felt somewhat an uneven API surface that 'quiet' can
be controlled with just a single bit and doing anything more than
that would require the caller to go into the structure to tweak.
Will queue. Thanks.
