Subject: [PATCH 0/2] update-index doc: note new caveats in 2.17

From: Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2018 21:04:29 +0000

On Fri, Feb 09 2018, Junio C. Hamano jotted:
> Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <[email-masked]> writes:
>> I think you / Nguyễn may not have seen my
>> <[email-masked]>
>> (https://public-inbox.org/git/[email-masked]/)
>>
>> As noted there I think it's best to proceed without the "dir.c: stop
>> ignoring opendir[...]" patch.
>>
>> It's going to be a bad regression in 2.17 if it ends up spewing pagefuls
>> of warnings in previously working repos if the UC is on.
>
> Well, I am not sure if it is a regression to diagnose problematic
> untracked cache information left by earlier version of the software
> with bugs.  After all, this is still an experimental feature, and we
> do want to see the warning to serve its purpose to diagnose possible
> remaining bugs, and new similar ones when a newer iteration of the
> feature introduces, no?

Fair enough. I just wanted to make sure it had been seen. It wasn't
obvious whether it had just been missed since there was no follow-up
there or note in WC.

We were disagreeing to the extent that some of this should be
documented in [email-masked] and related, and I
see you've ejected the doc patch I had in that series.

I really think we should be saying something like what this new doc
series says, it's conceptually on top of Duy's series but applies on
top of master.

I think there's room to quibble about whether to include 1/2 at all
since it's a relatively obscure edge case.

2/2 however is something I think a *lot* of users are going to hit. I
just skimmed the relevant bits of git-config and git-update-index now,
and nothing describes the UC as an experimental feature, and it's been
well-known to improve performance.

When users upgrade to 2.17 they're going to have git yelling at them
(as my users did) on existing checkouts, with no indication whatsoever
that it's due to the UC or how to fix it.

Let's at least documente it. I also wonder if the "dir.c: stop
ignoring opendir() error in open_cached_dir()" change shouldn't have
something in the warning itself about it being caused by the UC,
doesn't it only warn under that mode? I.e.:

    -"could not open directory '%s'")
    +"core.untrackedCache: could not open directory '%s'")

Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason (2):
  update-index doc: note a fixed bug in the untracked cache
  update-index doc: note the caveat with "could not open..."

 Documentation/git-update-index.txt | 26 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 1 file changed, 26 insertions(+)

-- 
2.15.1.424.g9478a66081