Subject: Re: [PATCHSET] git-reverse-trailer-xrefs: Reverse map cherry-picks and other cross-references

From: Tejun Heo <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2018 19:40:41 -0800

Hello, Junio.

On Thu, Dec 13, 2018 at 12:01:25PM +0900, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> > Wouldn't it be more useful to have repo-updated-with-these-commits
> > hook instead rather than putting more logic on note handling?
> >
> >> and scan the commits, just like you scan what you fetched.  And when
> >> you update the reverse mapping notes tree, the commit to record that
> >> notes update can record the tip of the above traversal.
> 
> I do not consider what you do in notes/xref-* "more logic on note
> handling" in the sense that the logic is part of "notes" API.
> 
> The moment you decided to reserve one hierarchy in refs/notes/ and
> designed what the mapping recorded there means, you designed a new
> trailer-xrefs API.  It is a part of that API how blobs stored in
> your refs/notes/xref-cherry-picks are formatted and what they mean.
> It's the same thing---it is also part of your API how the log
> message for recording commits in that hierarchy is formatted and
> what it means.

Hmmm... I see.  I still have a bit of trouble seeing why doing it that
way is better tho.  Wouldn't new-object-hook be simpler?  They'll
achieve about the same thing but one would need to keep the states in
two places.

> > As long as we can keep the reverse rference notes consistent, wouldn't
> > amend propagation just consume them?
> 
> Yes.  Would that mean you do not need the notes/xref-* series we are
> seeing here, and instead (re)use what Stefan's series, which already
> needs to have access to and record the information anyway, records?

Oh yeah, for sure.  Didn't know Stefan was doing something similar.
Will continue on the other reply.

Thanks.

-- 
tejun