Re: [PATCH v2] index-format.txt: be more liberal on what can represent invalid cache tree

2012-12-13 Thread Junio C Hamano
Junio C Hamano writes: > Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy writes: > >> How would that work with existing versions? If you write -2 in >> cache-tree, the next time 1.8.0 updates cache tree it writes -1 back. >> That loses whatever information you attach to -2. A new cache-tree >> extension is probably b

Re: [PATCH v2] index-format.txt: be more liberal on what can represent invalid cache tree

2012-12-12 Thread Junio C Hamano
Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy writes: > How would that work with existing versions? If you write -2 in > cache-tree, the next time 1.8.0 updates cache tree it writes -1 back. > That loses whatever information you attach to -2. A new cache-tree > extension is probably better. You can easily imagine a

[PATCH v2] index-format.txt: be more liberal on what can represent invalid cache tree

2012-12-12 Thread Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy
We have been writing -1 as "invalid" since day 1. On that same day we accept all negative entry counts as "invalid". So in theory all C Git versions out there would be happy to accept any negative numbers. JGit seems to do exactly the same. Correct the document to reflect the fact that -1 is not t