From: Sergey Organov <sorganov@gmail•com>
To: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox•com>
Cc: "Kristoffer Haugsbakk" <code@khaugsbakk•name>,
"Eric Sunshine" <sunshine@sunshineco•com>,
"Tao Klerks" <tao@klerks•biz>,
"Johannes Schindelin" <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx•de>,
"Taylor Blau" <me@ttaylorr•com>, "Patrick Steinhardt" <ps@pks•im>,
git <git@vger•kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Is "bare"ness in the context of multiple worktrees weird? Bitmap error in git gc.
Date: Thu, 07 Sep 2023 01:11:37 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <874jk7uf3a.fsf@osv.gnss.ru> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <xmqqwmx3m82l.fsf@gitster.g> (Junio C. Hamano's message of "Wed, 06 Sep 2023 12:10:26 -0700")
Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox•com> writes:
> Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox•com> writes:
>
>> "Kristoffer Haugsbakk" <code@khaugsbakk•name> writes:
>>
>>> But not with “worktree”:
>>>
>>> “ A repository can have zero (i.e. bare repository) or one or more
>>> worktrees attached to it. ...
>>>
>>> Since this entry claims that “bare repository” and “zero worktrees” are
>>> equivalent.
>>
>> I wrote that "(i.e. bare repository)" in 2df5387e (glossary:
>> describe "worktree", 2022-02-09) but did not mean that way.
>>
>> A non-bare repository can reduce the number of its worktrees, but it
>> cannot go below one, because the directory with working tree files
>> and the .git/ subdirectory, i.e. its primary worktree, must exist
>> for it to be a non-bare repository. Consequently a repository with
>> zero worktree is by definition a bare repository.
>>
>> But that does not have to mean all bare repositories can have no
>> worktrees.
>
> I re-read the glossary entry and I think the current text is mostly
> OK, except that it does not even have to mention "bare" at that
> position in the sentence. A bare repository with zero worktrees is
> totally uninteresting in the explanation of the worktree.
Sounds reasonable.
>
> We need to say that the repository data (configuration, refs and
> objecs) are mostly shared among worktrees while some data are kept
> per-worktree, which the current text adequately covers, and what is
> missing with respect to a bare repository is that we do not say
> worktrees can be attached after the fact to a repository that was
> created bare.
Why? Worktree could be attached after the fact to any repository. I
don't see why we need to mention bareness here, as it's not special in
this regard.
>
> So, perhaps something along this line?
>
> Documentation/glossary-content.txt | 16 +++++++++-------
> 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git c/Documentation/glossary-content.txt w/Documentation/glossary-content.txt
> index 5a537268e2..6dba68ffc0 100644
> --- c/Documentation/glossary-content.txt
> +++ w/Documentation/glossary-content.txt
> @@ -694,10 +694,12 @@ The most notable example is `HEAD`.
> plus any local changes that you have made but not yet committed.
>
> [[def_worktree]]worktree::
> - A repository can have zero (i.e. bare repository) or one or
> - more worktrees attached to it. One "worktree" consists of a
> - "working tree" and repository metadata, most of which are
> - shared among other worktrees of a single repository, and
> - some of which are maintained separately per worktree
> - (e.g. the index, HEAD and pseudorefs like MERGE_HEAD,
> - per-worktree refs and per-worktree configuration file).
> + A repository can have zero or more worktrees attached to it.
> + One "worktree" consists of a "working tree" and repository
> + metadata, most of which are shared among other worktrees of
> + a single repository, and some of which are maintained
> + separately per worktree (e.g. the index, HEAD and pseudorefs
> + like MERGE_HEAD, per-worktree refs and per-worktree
> + configuration file).
> ++
> +Note that worktrees can be attached to an existing bare repository.
"shared among other worktrees" -> "shared among all worktrees"?
Also, if we do have "main worktree" and "linked worktree" as concepts,
they need to be at least mentioned in the glossary, I believe.
Finally, if we do have "linked worktrees", then the phrasing should
better use "linked" instead of "attached"? Alternatively, if "attached"
fits better, let's call them "attached worktrees"?
--
Sergey Organov
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-09-06 22:11 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 31+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-09-04 14:41 Is "bare"ness in the context of multiple worktrees weird? Bitmap error in git gc Tao Klerks
2023-09-04 14:59 ` Tao Klerks
2023-09-04 15:29 ` Tao Klerks
2023-09-04 17:42 ` Kristoffer Haugsbakk
2023-09-04 17:56 ` Kristoffer Haugsbakk
2023-09-05 0:38 ` Eric Sunshine
2023-09-06 16:00 ` Kristoffer Haugsbakk
2023-09-06 16:39 ` Sergey Organov
2023-09-06 17:59 ` Kristoffer Haugsbakk
2023-09-06 18:04 ` Tao Klerks
2023-09-06 20:26 ` Junio C Hamano
2023-09-06 22:00 ` Sergey Organov
2023-09-06 22:15 ` Junio C Hamano
2023-09-06 22:34 ` Sergey Organov
2023-09-07 4:53 ` Tao Klerks
2023-09-07 6:33 ` Sergey Organov
2023-09-07 20:11 ` Kristoffer Haugsbakk
2023-09-07 15:07 ` Kristoffer Haugsbakk
2023-09-07 18:23 ` Junio C Hamano
2023-09-06 17:52 ` Junio C Hamano
2023-09-06 18:08 ` Kristoffer Haugsbakk
2023-09-06 19:10 ` Junio C Hamano
2023-09-06 22:11 ` Sergey Organov [this message]
2023-09-05 15:48 ` Tao Klerks
2023-09-05 0:26 ` Eric Sunshine
2023-09-05 1:09 ` Junio C Hamano
2023-09-05 5:43 ` Eric Sunshine
2023-09-05 15:13 ` Junio C Hamano
2023-09-05 16:25 ` Tao Klerks
2023-09-06 17:29 ` Kristoffer Haugsbakk
2023-09-05 16:10 ` Tao Klerks
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=874jk7uf3a.fsf@osv.gnss.ru \
--to=sorganov@gmail$(echo .)com \
--cc=Johannes.Schindelin@gmx$(echo .)de \
--cc=code@khaugsbakk$(echo .)name \
--cc=git@vger$(echo .)kernel.org \
--cc=gitster@pobox$(echo .)com \
--cc=me@ttaylorr$(echo .)com \
--cc=ps@pks$(echo .)im \
--cc=sunshine@sunshineco$(echo .)com \
--cc=tao@klerks$(echo .)biz \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox