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-Status: No, score=-3.8 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_PASS, SPF_PASS shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2F6CE1F55B for ; Wed, 20 May 2020 19:40:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726754AbgETTkV (ORCPT ); Wed, 20 May 2020 15:40:21 -0400 Received: from cloud.peff.net ([104.130.231.41]:52300 "EHLO cloud.peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726548AbgETTkU (ORCPT ); Wed, 20 May 2020 15:40:20 -0400 Received: (qmail 8568 invoked by uid 109); 20 May 2020 19:40:20 -0000 Received: from Unknown (HELO peff.net) (10.0.1.2) by cloud.peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.94) with ESMTP; Wed, 20 May 2020 19:40:20 +0000 Authentication-Results: cloud.peff.net; auth=none Received: (qmail 17141 invoked by uid 111); 20 May 2020 19:40:20 -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; Wed, 20 May 2020 15:40:20 -0400 Authentication-Results: peff.net; auth=none Date: Wed, 20 May 2020 15:40:19 -0400 From: Jeff King To: Andreas Schwab Cc: Junio C Hamano , Jonathan Nieder , Jonathan Tan , git@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Fetching 24 Linux commits = 1.2 GiB Message-ID: <20200520194019.GA340985@coredump.intra.peff.net> References: <20200415135627.vx75hsphbpmgrquv@chatter.i7.local> <87sgfvq967.fsf@igel.home> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <87sgfvq967.fsf@igel.home> Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Wed, May 20, 2020 at 10:53:36AM +0200, Andreas Schwab wrote: > On Apr 15 2020, Junio C Hamano wrote: > > > Do these (and I think we saw other reports) make us rethink the > > status of protocol v2 as the default? Are all of these fallouts > > we saw so far easy-to-fix bugs, or are there more fundamental issues > > in the v2 protocol design? > > I'm now seeing the issue myself, and can provide a backup of the > offending repository. The "too big fetch" issue has since been fixed in "master", as well as reverting the switch to the v2 protocol (which I think is just belt-and-suspenders; AFAIK there are no known issues after the fix). Both will be in v2.27. I don't see anything on "maint", but they _could_ be part of an eventual v2.26.3. The fix was merged in 0b07eecf6e (Merge branch 'jt/v2-fetch-nego-fix', 2020-05-01) for reference. -Peff