Re: [PATCH 0/3] Convert grep to recurse in-process
- Date: Wed, 12 Jul 2017 14:33:40 -0400
- From: Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] Convert grep to recurse in-process
On Wed, Jul 12, 2017 at 11:24:47AM -0700, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
> Jeff King wrote:
> > On Wed, Jul 12, 2017 at 11:06:03AM -0700, Brandon Williams wrote:
> >> Each 'struct repository' does have its own config so we could
> >> potentially want a config in a submodule to override some config in the
> >> superproject. Though for right now it may be simpler to not worry about
> >> doing this overriding, mostly because you would only want to allow
> >> overriding of some configuration and not all configuration. One example
> >> would be the number of threads allowed in grep,
> > I think that's probably one of the more complicated cases, and I don't
> > think it really needs to be done on day one.
> That's fair. Could you give an example of a simpler case?
I think core.quotepath that I gave is one example that I'd expect to
work differently than it does in 'next'. Though I really think that's a
fairly uninteresting one, as it's extremely unlikely to be set on a
Something like color.grep.* is in the same boat (I think it ought to
respect submodule config, but I'd be surprised if anybody cares).
I know those are kind of lame examples, and if they remain broken
forever, I don't know if anybody would care. I'm more concerned about us
missing a case that causes a regression (and unlike some regressions,
where you say "oops, a bug" and fix it, I'd worry that we'll have made a
big jump to an in-process model, and the only fixes are "implement a
complete split-config solution" or "revert back to multiple processes").
I do agree that not having concrete examples makes it harder to reason
about the desired semantics.