From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.9 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_NONE shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1572B1F45D for ; Sun, 22 Mar 2020 19:22:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726756AbgCVTWg (ORCPT ); Sun, 22 Mar 2020 15:22:36 -0400 Received: from cloud.peff.net ([104.130.231.41]:47312 "HELO cloud.peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1726137AbgCVTWf (ORCPT ); Sun, 22 Mar 2020 15:22:35 -0400 Received: (qmail 30534 invoked by uid 109); 22 Mar 2020 19:22:35 -0000 Received: from Unknown (HELO peff.net) (10.0.1.2) by cloud.peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.94) with SMTP; Sun, 22 Mar 2020 19:22:35 +0000 Authentication-Results: cloud.peff.net; auth=none Received: (qmail 2698 invoked by uid 111); 22 Mar 2020 19:32:21 -0000 Received: from coredump.intra.peff.net (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (10.0.0.2) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.94) with (TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 encrypted) ESMTPS; Sun, 22 Mar 2020 15:32:21 -0400 Authentication-Results: peff.net; auth=none Date: Sun, 22 Mar 2020 15:22:34 -0400 From: Jeff King To: Derrick Stolee Cc: Christian Couder , Derrick Stolee via GitGitGadget , git , Taylor Blau , Jonathan Tan , Jeff Hostetler , Derrick Stolee Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] Slightly simplify partial clone user experience Message-ID: <20200322192234.GC671552@coredump.intra.peff.net> References: <20200322095137.GB635598@coredump.intra.peff.net> <5baf9f4c-9ce0-0384-1113-431038c2a646@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <5baf9f4c-9ce0-0384-1113-431038c2a646@gmail.com> Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Sun, Mar 22, 2020 at 12:45:29PM -0400, Derrick Stolee wrote: > >> I have mixed feelings on this. I do like making things less arcane for > >> users. But are we locking in a behavior for --partial that we might not > >> want to live with forever? I.e., the current thinking for partial clones > >> is to fetch no blobs at all, get all commits and trees, apply sparse > >> filters, and then fault in the blobs we need. But imagine we later grow > >> the ability to easily avoid fetching all of the trees. Would we regret > >> having the simple name "--partial" taken? > > > > I agree with that. Something like "--filter-blobs" for > > "--filter=blob:none" and perhaps "--filter-blobs=" for > > "--filter=blob:limit=" might be worth it though. > > Thanks for the perspective on this. The --filter-blobs[=] should > be less likely to collide with an alternative definition of "partial". Yes, though I wonder if it's really that big an improvement over "--filter=blob:none". > While we are thinking in this space, what if we had a "partial-clone" > builtin? It could be a light wrapper around "git clone" where > > git partial-clone [--limit=] [options] [] > > would do the same thing as > > git clone --filter=blob:[none|limit=] [options] [] > > Just spit-balling here. I think that just shifts my concern out to the other command; i.e., would we later want the partial-clone command to behave differently. And introducing a wrapper creates a weird non-orthogonality where it's not necessary. I _do_ think a wrapper could make sense when it's doing substantially different things, or multiple steps that don't belong in the original program (e.g., the way Scalar works). > In the meantime, I'll work to adjust my patches to only be the > documentation of the --filter option. Thanks, that seems like an obvious and easy improvement. -Peff