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=-11.5 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_MED, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL 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 24D311F9FD for ; Fri, 5 Mar 2021 23:12:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S229651AbhCEXL7 (ORCPT ); Fri, 5 Mar 2021 18:11:59 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:33700 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229629AbhCEXLb (ORCPT ); Fri, 5 Mar 2021 18:11:31 -0500 Received: from mail-pl1-x649.google.com (mail-pl1-x649.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::649]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7C63FC06175F for ; Fri, 5 Mar 2021 15:11:31 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-pl1-x649.google.com with SMTP id g7so2256333pll.11 for ; Fri, 05 Mar 2021 15:11:31 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20161025; h=sender:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references:subject :from:to:cc; bh=1IoTnhELr+p7e7GlbC1veCgPcKpeq2VOvxDi14X4PhM=; b=odvxLZoZ2keogjTtCnCflOFgEWd94prUmX1nmHTlfAtO0NC0b1DQ4iJlBriW2n4jSy VCoPfu++Hbs8eQnrmuUoV5lO1Sgu+34c0Yo9kNh/y5Bz+aa7f1P5Zyrj+/GV7f/ou5+0 AfU5gNOZSMjFxNxF7CrKzEaG8VMk+JxeAQEl3kqw89H3h+zdB8m3l/ZvFtGeokSY/eLd Pux3u/hfnxVplwgBhMb/ZnTkLuM5OoATBdEhdUZvsmAknjmO2gcPYAbODXPgH8JEsw1s vXmvRc4Pu7Owbu5eS/9Br4Th2O1sarlgCxYNP+8N7EhWMcvSaob32IgSE/aKh9bQLrti ryBA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:sender:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :references:subject:from:to:cc; bh=1IoTnhELr+p7e7GlbC1veCgPcKpeq2VOvxDi14X4PhM=; b=nXSBBsJFneANG+3aJiHDI9iQx4zpvY4eGi+mW6qY3oezy1GON870lXhIknKm40vQFG Jr9mCbFwgt9eiQ3ZVk7feHl+jrmnmbH6FLFv9xIvJFwbNunn9CyEEIs9QkUFuJU1vC2G oyMlq+u7Bhndt3N7OQV7Z2iXKdSJcMeR+JXsJ1lFiUDhvBOSJOpXve+aQrdUsiktYdRF Yz6gK+3jWCo2R8e9M4wRcmmFUXshA02t2IU6exLTcPNtkZy5QssIg4Y9TB9mJIdfXHxS lI4RK8jxrBB+VG0GlijlgznpRCJ5JpRFP1Ux/gOaByrGjZ3UX5ybn4xtxAYELvvfu6u+ z83g== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5318E5tp1UCCXZVXtNWlte/aixFL2OMy+BjcyVljj/ZZ2AD8Nzho SUZAZPYel6qwAfx1bCPMzfRGjjROUk4sPpEMA/VK X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJy8+TBWJ5uje49E2uC0uAJMW/Ajrcuf6RMkKb/oqHNe+yPC3JnOfupxU7CiJKbBQd75kMvu2BHkEvtlsDjLMf7u Sender: "jonathantanmy via sendgmr" X-Received: from twelve4.c.googlers.com ([fda3:e722:ac3:cc00:24:72f4:c0a8:437a]) (user=jonathantanmy job=sendgmr) by 2002:a17:902:eb11:b029:e4:a5c3:4328 with SMTP id l17-20020a170902eb11b02900e4a5c34328mr10835839plb.7.1614985890939; Fri, 05 Mar 2021 15:11:30 -0800 (PST) Date: Fri, 5 Mar 2021 15:11:28 -0800 In-Reply-To: Message-Id: <20210305231128.741196-1-jonathantanmy@google.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 References: X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.30.1.766.gb4fecdf3b7-goog Subject: Re: [PATCH] fetch-pack: do not mix --pack_header and packfile uri From: Jonathan Tan To: gitster@pobox.com Cc: jonathantanmy@google.com, git@vger.kernel.org, jrnieder@gmail.com, nmulcahey@google.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org > By the way, the band-aid in this patch may be OK for the upcoming > release (purely because it is easy to see that is sufficient for > today's codebase), but I said the above because I worry about the > health of the codebase in the longer term. The "pass_header" may > not stay to be the only difference between the URI packfile and > in-stream packfile in the way they make index-pack invocations. That is true, but at the same time, I think it's better to have the arguments be the same because there are options (e.g. --promisor and --fsck-objects) that have to be duplicated, and I think that for the most part, the URI packfiles and the inline packfile will be processed identically.