On Fri, Sep 06, 2013 at 07:46:01AM +0700, Nguyen Thai Ngoc Duy wrote:

> ---
>  I had something that could unpack without writing to temp pack file
>  but I scraped it and chose this way because it follows closely how
>  index-pack works. It's a good thing imo because .pack v4 is coming
>  and I don't know how v4 may impact this unpack code path. Once things
>  are settled, we can revisit and open a separate code path if it's
>  still a good idea.

>From a cursory read, this seems fine. If it were done in complete
isolation, I'd say it was a slight regression, just because we are doing
more I/O for the unpack case, and it is not really saving us any code
(it is not like we can throw away unpack-objects, as I think we would
want to keep it as a last resort for getting data out of malformed or
otherwise non-indexable packs).

But I can also see it making pack v4 handling easier. So it would make
sense to me to put it at the start of a series adding pack v4 indexing.
By the end of the series you would be able to see the benefits of the
reduced code complexity. Until then, it is a "probably this will help
later" change.

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

Reply via email to