On Sat, Oct 12, 2024 at 10:05 AM Jonathan Tan <jonathantanmy@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > So I think we'll need to use do_not_die_on_missing_objects. It does have > the weakness that if the object is not supposed to be missing, we don't > inform the user, but perhaps this is OK here because we know that all > objects we encounter on this object walk are promisor objects, so if > it's missing, it's OK. And I think users would prefer the git command to succeed if possible, rather than die on the first (noncritical) error. Maybe show a warning and swallow the error? > In addition to do_not_die_on_missing_objects, we'll also need the actual > code that stops iteration through objects that pass our "best effort" > promisor object check. Probably the best place is in get_revision_1() > after the NULL check get_revision_1() only does commit limiting though. Some callers of rev-list also do tree walking on commits, in a (corrupted) partial repo, tree could also be missing. There isn't a central place we can stop tree walking, callers using this feature would have to implement "tree walking early termination" themself.
