Re: [Outreachy][PATCH] abspath: reconcile `dir_exists()` and `is_directory()`

["Miriam R." <mirucam@gmail.com>]

Dear all,
there is already a static function called path_exists() in archive.c
so project does not compile.

Maybe we could change the name of this static function and its
reference in archive.c like archive_path_exists() for example, or some
other you find more suitable.

Best,
Miriam

El vie., 25 oct. 2019 a las 17:23, Miriam R. (<mirucam@gmail.com>) escribió:
>
> Ok! Thanks to everyone.
>
> Best,
> Miriam
>
> El vie., 25 oct. 2019 a las 16:48, Christian Couder
> (<christian.couder@gmail.com>) escribió:
> >
> > On Fri, Oct 25, 2019 at 11:43 AM Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > "Miriam R." <mirucam@gmail.com> writes:
> > >
> > > > Ok, then after discussion, finally the issue tasks would be:
> > > >
> > > > - Add path_exists() that will work same as file_exists(), keeping for
> > > > now the latter.
> > > > - Use path_exists() instead of dir_exists() in builtin/clone.c.
> > >
> > > Sounds about right.
> > >
> > > > And also:
> > > > - Rename is_directory() to dir_exists(), as it is the equivalent to
> > > > path_exists()/file_exists(), isn't it?
> > >
> > > I wouldn't go there in the same series, if I were doing it.  I'd
> > > expect that such a patch would be more noisy than it is worth if
> > > done in a single step.  In order to avoid becoming a hindrance to
> > > other topics in flight, an ideal series to do so would support the
> > > same functionality with both old and new names, convert code that
> > > use the old name to use the new name, possibly in multiple patches
> > > to avoid unnecessary textual conflicts (i.e. some of these patches
> > > made to areas that are seeing active development will be discarded
> > > and need to be retried later when the area is more quiet) and then
> > > finally the function wither the old name gets removed.
> > >
> > > You would not want to mix the first two bullet points that are
> > > relatively isolated with such a long transition.
> >
> > Yeah, and for a micro-project it is more than enough if you only work
> > on the first two bullet points.