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: AS3215 2.6.0.0/16 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.6 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from out1.vger.email (out1.vger.email [IPv6:2620:137:e000::1:20]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 64C061F4D8 for ; Mon, 9 May 2022 17:23:03 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: dcvr.yhbt.net; dkim=pass (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="qTfqqL2E"; dkim-atps=neutral Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S239571AbiEIR0R (ORCPT ); Mon, 9 May 2022 13:26:17 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:58794 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S239770AbiEIR0J (ORCPT ); Mon, 9 May 2022 13:26:09 -0400 Received: from mail-pl1-x629.google.com (mail-pl1-x629.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::629]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0824826087D for ; Mon, 9 May 2022 10:22:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pl1-x629.google.com with SMTP id n8so14523308plh.1 for ; Mon, 09 May 2022 10:22:15 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=6j0L9cZjZsJjpWZGaEQQpIaqKBLIhH6t1c81WwPAICU=; b=qTfqqL2EpYQGxgyqTvUcSrldHqbOAmyFHhkjRiFEi855/gEGWIdejoSj7+b9DZsu7g 4n89E/wbA5d/fqo25jzcxjY9vYbvLpJB8lRh5z6UTaIfLxW/f87clZcbd9g/ftjI8CfF qpkgJQ77VIXAfDHvxkzh0ghh7FUKe5pLSnrFepS8qjVCTU1LUh50P2QasMY+7+Q9xtUW 76SYh/qVFi6Z9hBTqmw2whZJI60KmVKpV4RGMH76CpPDvdGtk6b32/f8O+XhU36CiD85 4sPxe5fpOq3Hlzrb/mDXhK98k7bf1+LwoAcPdm0VkeJXgqAE3tj6VO426mQTHVPuMxvf fstA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to :references:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=6j0L9cZjZsJjpWZGaEQQpIaqKBLIhH6t1c81WwPAICU=; b=bdTNmFdqBKWSzNPZJCI8fndbN8Gjj/ZqEgFPb6njHJoTbq8JhGM4d8RXmAIgPH8VSJ QSc/hnfE2wb41bXNCInmnlr//2dPTPytexEQlm5yRaTmiroBo5b8j9WApnw+BLi3grj/ 1RuUt1JSeqxIoEBlv7fYX3fRapcbM+vT9qCp2o9ejkALNCXBiCHXA/zWgouVAt6rzBG/ GpNk6E1zuA/dN8RlSnKzrLN0FjOwmIZJ1GBmtUyHrHasC7ffDPPXC2chCuTLA4xm0XGI 1De2bxEvyDe5A51qk9BssiwLAwmNJz+lqIFwOCZZRUhZERJsS+vq7L7yBEujmT1gBIEU VRVg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532WbEJxmX8UhX4EZEDf9lSJpR26+IIcX+JkZ2gRPsqMmiLpI5b0 wFwrkexQn5S9ohcvv7aU1dk= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzdSqpc5fFbeRS85Dc96tqPnsddyFO/fyVTK7xa7F5bQtJfhnM27Pgmas0T9XuNC56dbEhrYw== X-Received: by 2002:a17:90b:4b4e:b0:1dc:74d0:c8d4 with SMTP id mi14-20020a17090b4b4e00b001dc74d0c8d4mr19118589pjb.138.1652116934279; Mon, 09 May 2022 10:22:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([2409:4061:2bc7:fe6a:45d7:9aca:a60d:d904]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 19-20020a17090a019300b001cb978f906esm8995076pjc.0.2022.05.09.10.22.10 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_CHACHA20_POLY1305_SHA256 bits=256/256); Mon, 09 May 2022 10:22:13 -0700 (PDT) From: Abhradeep Chakraborty To: Taylor Blau Cc: Abhradeep Chakraborty , Git , Junio C Hamano , Philip Oakley , Philippe Blain Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] builtin/remote.c: teach `-v` to list filters for promisor remotes Date: Mon, 9 May 2022 22:51:57 +0530 Message-Id: <20220509172157.28593-1-chakrabortyabhradeep79@gmail.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.35.1 In-Reply-To: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Taylor Blau wrote: > But there was a good question raised by Phillip in > > https://lore.kernel.org/git/ab047b4b-6037-af78-1af6-ad35ac6d7c90@iee.email/ > > that I didn't see addressed in your response, which was "why not put > this behind a new `--show-partial-filter` option"? Actually, I addressed it[1] - > ... Another point is that > it's important for an user to know which one is a promisor remote and what > filter type they use. If we go with the current implementation the output > would be let's say - > origin (fetch) > origin (push) > upstream (fetch) > upstream (push) > > By seeing the above output anyone may assume that all the remotes are > normal remotes. If the user now try to run `git pull origin` and suddenly > he/she discover that some blobs are not downloaded. He/she run the above > mentioned (1) command and find that this is a promisor remote! > > Here `remote -v` didn't warn the user about the origin remote being an > promisor remote. Instead it makes him/her assume that all are normal > remotes. Providing only these three info (i.e. , > and ) is not sufficient - it only shows the half of the picture. If we use a new `--show-partial-clone` flag, users can get to know about promisor remotes only if he/she use this flag. As I said in the refered comment, it may happen that the user unfortunately use the flag AFTER the accident - to know about if that was the promisor remote! See this also[2] - > ... If > we can specify `(fetch)` in the output then why not the filter of that > `fetch` on which the behaviour of `fetch` functionality highly depends? Taylor Blau wrote: > But I can see where it _would_ be useful. So it would be nice to be able > to turn the extra output on in those cases, but _only_ those cases, and > a flag would be a nice way to go about doing that. Adding the extra flag is not a good approach to me due to the above reason. But at the end of the day, all of you have a lots of experience in this field than me. You all could better tell which one is better approach. [1] https://lore.kernel.org/git/20220501193807.94369-1-chakrabortyabhradeep79@gmail.com/ [2] https://lore.kernel.org/git/20220502145624.12702-1-chakrabortyabhradeep79@gmail.com/ Thanks :)