Jeff King <p...@peff.net> writes:
>> Then it will be very natural for the extension data that store the
>> commit metainfo to name objects in the pack the .idx file describes
>> by the offset in the SHA-1 table.
> I guess your argument is that putting it all in the same file makes it
> more natural for there to be a data dependency.
It is more about the "I am torn on this one" I mentioned earlier.
It would be more "logical" if this weren't tied to a particular
pack, as the properties of a commit you record in this series do not
depend on which pack the commit is in, and such a repository-global
file by definition cannot be inside anybody's .idx.
But if we split the information into separate pieces and store one
piece per .idx for implementation reasons, it is crazy not to at
least consider it a longer term goal to put it inside .idx file.
Of course, it is more convenient to store this kind of things in a
separate file while experimenting and improving the mechanism, but I
do not think we want to see each packfile in a repository comes with
47 auxiliary files with different suffixes 5 years down the road.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html