Karthik Nayak <karthik.188@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > From: Karthik Nayak <karthik.188@xxxxxxxxx> > > In the previous commits, we converted `refs_create_symref()` to utilize > transactions to perform symref updates. Earlier `refs_create_symref()` > used `create_symref()` to do the same. > > We can now remove `create_symref()` and any code associated with it > which is no longer used. We remove `create_symref()` code from all the > reference backends and also remove it entirely from the `ref_storage_be` > struct. > > Signed-off-by: Karthik Nayak <karthik.188@xxxxxxxxx> > --- This has serious semantic conflicts with in-flight topics. I think I resolved them all correctly while merging it in 'seen', but please double check the result after I push it out. This comment equally applies to the "force all callers to use get_main_ref_store() on the_repository and remove functions that implicitly used the main ref store of the_repository" topic by Patrick, but we really should devise a bit more smoother way to cope with out of tree and in-flight topics. For example, as the new refs_update_symref() function works exactly like the existing refs_create_symref() function, after renaming all the in-base (i.e., in-tree at the point this topic forks from) users to call the new function, instead of just removing the original one, it would have been nice to guide authors of other in-flight topics by (1) causing build failure and at the same time (2) telling them what they need to do to adjust to the new world order. This patch does only (1) but does a poor job for (2). We may want to establish a better convention than just outright removing and breaking others' topics. Thanks.
