Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] bulk-checkin: wire repository variable

From: Junio C Hamano <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2025 13:32:22 -0700

Justin Tobler <[email-masked]> writes:

> Thinking about this more, we should probably just require
> `index_blob_bulk_checkin()` be provided a transaction. Callers will need
> to ensure a transaction is running so that a `struct
> bulk_checkin_packfile` gets set up, but this shouldn't be a big deal.

Thanks for thinking this through.  I think reducing the number of
oddball callers-from-sideways leads us to good code hygiene.

> With this we could easily just propagate the transaction for all these
> function as you suggested.
>
> I'll do this in the next version. Thanks!
>
> -Justin