Re: [Question] Is extensions.partialClone defunct?

[Taylor Blau <me@ttaylorr.com>]

On Thu, Mar 12, 2020 at 10:51:51AM -0700, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
> Jonathan Tan wrote:
> > Derrick Stolee wrote:
>
> >> but it appears that we rely on the "remote.<name>.promisor = true"
> >> setting instead of this extension.
> >
> > Hmm...besides giving the name of the promisor remote, the
> > extensions.partialClone setting is there to prevent old versions of Git
> > (that do not know this extension) from manipulating the repo.

Manipulating it how?

> Yes, so the lack of setting is a bug.
>
> Christian, what would your prefered way be to fix this?  Should
> extensions.partialclone specify a particular "default" promisor
> remote, or should we use a new repository extension for multiple
> promisors?

This ambiguity makes me think that 'extensions.partialClone' is an
awkward fit for repositories that have multiple promisor remotes.

> [...]
> > I cloned and indeed it is as Stolee describes. Git still works as
> > expected if I remove "promisor = true" and add
> > "[extensions]\npartialclone=origin", so at least extensions.partialClone
> > is still supported, even if not written by default.
>
> Thanks for investigating.
>
> Sincerely,
> Jonathan

Thanks,
Taylor