This technically looks fine, but I'm surprised that we're keeping a LegacyLocalTarLoader if we're not going to deprecate it. We should figure out whether we can drop it completely at some point?

This revision is now accepted and ready to land.Dec 20 2018, 6:11 PM

In D871#18661, @olasd wrote:

This technically looks fine, but I'm surprised that we're keeping a LegacyLocalTarLoader if we're not going to deprecate it. We should figure out whether we can drop it completely at some point?

Yes, dropping it is the goal.
That legacy tar loader is a simple, decompress this and by the way, use this origin, revision, and snapshot that i gave you as scaffolding (don't forget to fill in the identifier when you're done completing the holes).
It was used for the first gnu tarball ingestion.

Then it got used (and still is) by the deposit loader (inheriting from it).

I'd like to refactor the deposit loader to stop inheriting from this one and use a collaborator approach instead.
This will help, most notably for the sparse deposit.

Then, we should be able to drop this.

Closed by commit rDLDTAR6e5b29dfddf2: tar.loader: Remove retro-compatible name (authored by ardumont). · Explain WhyDec 20 2018, 6:33 PM

This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes.