Hi, On Sat, 8 Mar 2008, Daniel Barkalow wrote: > On Sun, 9 Mar 2008, Johannes Schindelin wrote: > > > On Sat, 8 Mar 2008, Daniel Barkalow wrote: > > > > > The caller first calls set_git_dir() to specify the GIT_DIR, and then > > > calls init_db() to initialize it. This also cleans up various parts of > > > the code to account for the fact that everything is done with GIT_DIR > > > set, so it's unnecessary to pass the specified directory around. > > > > I think the most controversial part is that you change the way it is > > determined if the repository is a bare one. It might have the same > > result (I do not have time to check it...), but the computation is > > performed differently. > > It's actually doing the same computation; the difference is how the result > is reported. Mine commits to the repo being non-bare if it doesn't think > it's bare, which the current code leaves as "we don't know, assume > non-bare". But since we actually create a work tree if we guess it's > non-bare, it really is non-bare. So then the later code can assume it's > either 0 or 1, and not worry about -1 being equivalent to 0. Okay. Thanks, Dscho -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
