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=-0.5 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,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 7D3CC1F4CE for ; Fri, 1 Apr 2022 10:32:17 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1343751AbiDAKeA (ORCPT ); Fri, 1 Apr 2022 06:34:00 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:55516 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S232488AbiDAKd7 (ORCPT ); Fri, 1 Apr 2022 06:33:59 -0400 Received: from mail-pf1-x434.google.com (mail-pf1-x434.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::434]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3429026E012 for ; Fri, 1 Apr 2022 03:32:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pf1-x434.google.com with SMTP id bo5so2268186pfb.4 for ; Fri, 01 Apr 2022 03:32:08 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=coup.net.nz; s=google; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=GcSEuEIk/RX+HVoBZmH68kiDm7ncO1O3eisI2VHGad4=; b=U+NkWhxrZ5OwZt9ybv0Ja6JD31v+zyx6idBn27/VWL0navbEQDzp9jAAYHTLJKo9Xw RAg0tE61vZHv3OOvLMYSl0KcWo0iRaJ6EHz6mup8LRCubh+0SmFi8L2n/A68U/ZAbUDE /E4GhStuRUQx3eCDt3TT8I+l3jeRZvHhQy8O0= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=GcSEuEIk/RX+HVoBZmH68kiDm7ncO1O3eisI2VHGad4=; b=I2Qmrahp3S8eP37tKsLmpqyHWnBRt1qBOvDbjjZpIgYcM6V4CJ+uN0oWWt+1Tyzg9K mPEtd0My1qtKEWcAE3PWCmE9u3xZRPLUzWK5aMF6+AKSx5Mmygqrddhf9yTaio4AVuJB wSmTczJVBY5cp2Reg5MiMZwLzTyDBG/v63ZLrh3XkLtWferZLvq+q4yrSibdlYJhlQs5 gX6jwAvJBNtz7yN5Uh7K9lmEjTTebCfH3gU3UWRIQIie07FGhVCQjLfUA3Tl/Mfhk7O3 bBp8pj7DCIxLXoZVdQoF+xqweqaU4oQUmnTM2kM3X4gjRJXV2Mj9jp6+OPkOyCPsrJ16 Z8BQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531HyueaJAjm+FAKRMBmpJxSLrj2w279JYDtODzFQcEGWGydlL/d ilzkf7u+huoWqktCOYTs6tY91sUBfdzgwaiumazNIg== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJx97oCYyKBgf+ZWAVqD760UpIPfBnQOd6CFOW8oejUJq4H560D1J5JUujUZYCvNe/uSH2t8B+750x+hJUexrQU= X-Received: by 2002:a63:4405:0:b0:382:173c:1b97 with SMTP id r5-20020a634405000000b00382173c1b97mr14297087pga.532.1648809127672; Fri, 01 Apr 2022 03:32:07 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <78501bbf28105ef252976266abb437a278585609.1648476132.git.gitgitgadget@gmail.com> <220331.86k0cap2rc.gmgdl@evledraar.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <220331.86k0cap2rc.gmgdl@evledraar.gmail.com> From: Robert Coup Date: Fri, 1 Apr 2022 11:31:56 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 4/7] fetch: add --refetch option To: =?UTF-8?B?w4Z2YXIgQXJuZmrDtnLDsCBCamFybWFzb24=?= Cc: Robert Coup via GitGitGadget , git@vger.kernel.org, Jonathan Tan , John Cai , Jeff Hostetler , Junio C Hamano , Derrick Stolee , Calvin Wan Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Hi =C3=86var, On Thu, 31 Mar 2022 at 16:20, =C3=86var Arnfj=C3=B6r=C3=B0 Bjarmason wrote: > > +--refetch:: > > + Instead of negotiating with the server to avoid transferring comm= its and > > + associated objects that are already present locally, this option = fetches > > + all objects as a fresh clone would. Use this to reapply a partial= clone > > + filter from configuration or using `--filter=3D` when the filter > > + definition has changed. > > Re my comment on negotiation specifics in 2/7, this documentation is > really over-promising depending on what the answer to that is: > https://lore.kernel.org/git/220331.86o81mp2w1.gmgdl@evledraar.gmail.com/ > > I.e. instead of saying that we WILL fetch all objects "just like a > clone" shouldn't we have less focus on implementation details here, and > assure the user that we'll make their object store "complete" as though > --filter hadn't been used, without going into the specifics of what'll > happen over the wire? That's not quite the case though: we'll make their object db complete as if a fresh clone with any specified --filter (including none) from that remote has been done. IMO explaining what will happen and to expect (particularly as this is _not_ transferring some sort of object-delta-set, clone transfers can be big) is a good thing. If it improves later; then change the docs. Alternatively, rewording along the lines of "it will fix up your object db to match a changed filter" is implying that only the missing bits will be fetched. Thanks, Rob.