Subject: Re: [PATCH] index-format.txt: remove outdated list of supported extensions

From: Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2022 15:35:24 +0200

On Mon, Jul 18 2022, SZEDER Gábor wrote:

> The first section of 'Documentation/technical/index-format.txt'
> mentions that "Git currently supports cache tree and resolve undo
> extensions", but then goes on, and in the "Extensions" section
> describes not only these two, but six other extensions [1].
>
> Remove this sentence, as it's misleading about the status of all those
> other extensions.
>
> Alternatively we could keep that sentence and update the list of
> extensions, but that might well lead to a recurring issue, because
> apparently this list is never updated when a new index extension is
> added.
>
> [1] Split index, untracked cache, FS monitor cache, end of index
>     entry, index entry offset table and sparse directory entries.
>
> Signed-off-by: SZEDER Gábor <[email-masked]>
> ---
>  Documentation/technical/index-format.txt | 2 --
>  1 file changed, 2 deletions(-)

Note that there's a conflict with my series to move this to
gitformat-index(5), although the conflict is easily solved:
https://lore.kernel.org/git/[email-masked]/

> diff --git a/Documentation/technical/index-format.txt b/Documentation/technical/index-format.txt
> index 65da0daaa5..f691c20ab0 100644
> --- a/Documentation/technical/index-format.txt
> +++ b/Documentation/technical/index-format.txt
> @@ -26,8 +26,6 @@ Git index format
>       Extensions are identified by signature. Optional extensions can
>       be ignored if Git does not understand them.
>  
> -     Git currently supports cache tree and resolve undo extensions.
> -
>       4-byte extension signature. If the first byte is 'A'..'Z' the
>       extension is optional and can be ignored.

I wonder if we should instead say : git currently supports various index
extensions, see <asciidoc syntax to link to section below>.