On Mon, Oct 28, 2024 at 07:00:11PM +0000, Caleb White wrote: > > But that's OK, and we can figure out a path forward here. I am just > > trying to say that this highlights the importance of following the WC > > reports regularly to catch cases where the maintainer missed some > > important piece of information. > > My apologies, this was my first patch submission to Git and I was not > exactly the process by which topics progressed from `seen` to `next` to > `master`. I will be sure to follow the reports more closely in the future. It's not a problem, and I am glad that you have found an interest in contributing to the Git project. We'll figure this one out :-). > >> Adding the extension was the direction suggested by Junio in the > >> previous round. Git did not account for the possibility of the linking > >> files containing relative paths, so there's really no way to make this > >> change without breaking compatibility with older versions of Git. Git > >> had to be taught how to handle files that could contain either absolute > >> or relative paths. > > > > Yep, that makes sense. My preference here would be to make the new > > behavior opt *in*, rather than opt-out, so that: > > > > - Users who do not experience problems with writing worktrees that > > have absolute paths can continue to do so without any changes. > > > > - Users who use worktrees *and* do not write relative paths can > > upgrade between successive versions without requiring a new > > repository extension that would break older Git versions. > > > > - That we only add that extension to the repository's configuration if > > and when the user has opted into the new behavior. > > > > Reading this new series, I *think* that is the behavior that you settled > > on, which seems quite reasonable to me. Can you confirm that I'm reading > > this all correctly? Assuming so, I think that we are in a reasonable > > position[^1] to review this series instead of having to back out the new > > behavior. > > Yes this is correct. The new behavior is opt-in and the extension is > only added to the repository configuration if the user creates > a worktree with relative paths. That is great. I'm glad that we're on the same page here, and that my understanding matches reality. > > Thanks for bearing with me here, I am quite embarrassed to have missed > > Junio's mail that I mentioned earlier, but I appreciate your patience > > while we sort this out together. > > No worries! I appreciate your feedback and I'm glad we're able to > sort this out. Not a problem, and again, I very much appreciate your patience and willingness to work on this. Thanks, Taylor
