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=-3.5 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS 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 713331F910 for ; Tue, 1 Nov 2022 01:16:25 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: dcvr.yhbt.net; dkim=pass (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=ttaylorr-com.20210112.gappssmtp.com header.i=@ttaylorr-com.20210112.gappssmtp.com header.b="fM9Clev/"; dkim-atps=neutral Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S229842AbiKABQX (ORCPT ); Mon, 31 Oct 2022 21:16:23 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:55754 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229469AbiKABQW (ORCPT ); Mon, 31 Oct 2022 21:16:22 -0400 Received: from mail-il1-x136.google.com (mail-il1-x136.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::136]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8D0FF167DD for ; Mon, 31 Oct 2022 18:16:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-il1-x136.google.com with SMTP id o13so752431ilq.6 for ; Mon, 31 Oct 2022 18:16:21 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ttaylorr-com.20210112.gappssmtp.com; s=20210112; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=wlFF3Kbvwamp9sOQYi62VGotgFnzjJ4qRFpldY0KXBM=; b=fM9Clev/WqvyNBaOWkIuZKO8lN3/xUEAv4h3Cj6GnLE90cB6Oehop7gwXGXosPhJNy tKWtLRbdo3TJ1mgaNHZ56h3cvTGPPv14tRTiS119p45ZcKbq6YYU9+XpG0JWSrCVKKEQ PEED5ZHDe4QSD0YK7M8fuRbrmcgQFfK/mK3jfEFmWTAkf8CtdZu/vClIWinNA9GgqeVp d4TDE6MIox42Ogln7xqdY1thdhJf2huyyfY2LbPV0xvn74liLeYfIduMf0eQ6cUKZZRe CZYQngtxWl7+op0j4nVFmrcSwyRADrtm1dgHoJReCZxDRLqEL6Q2QfXsrhHnT/v2Tt3I uIVg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=wlFF3Kbvwamp9sOQYi62VGotgFnzjJ4qRFpldY0KXBM=; b=w3eDOEDumIJkiFGBvgZTtNoS/A6pztSkNrt95tdinAKSLwlqTKoE9YyFAHG8Hs3aDp koka+wX4dcmyoSAc0cFdR00Y2suPRhdNXt2FMWr3I8G2aQN72UuSP7Gr/1Fmt5idQJiW 02HqnzD/+AHUhGhki3M2aW/M5EbqqrhjxuFQqpphTYaWySEUc4mIYdtfkA+4fF/p3IVp 03uwiQamPlspt4olpnfeA2RjRRTQBZYetM2pv0EnxFBGt4NT9L/0oOMcI/kY96A/B12d rK4Tk8ceNJBBTr+TxLHdW4MGc6LjdjqYcl/iX7rhG9eLjQJQsLK6RnDv+h2sfz0ii5Ze Ju1Q== X-Gm-Message-State: ACrzQf1sq2Hj2ymMpRVoi6BHCewZqhFw7MedEDW0tnlDtkQJLDwrKyo2 Au4U09dFQ3b3ezeAyggt0laT9e4MdBxhJ9E3 X-Google-Smtp-Source: AMsMyM7/y88SshWj1smyn8wZpQtWsxr/ugikWGLYuruo8i9hOey4RBFr/HaMyxr6rOH9tBMbPN4VgA== X-Received: by 2002:a92:d444:0:b0:300:7d24:13e7 with SMTP id r4-20020a92d444000000b003007d2413e7mr9201231ilm.116.1667265380979; Mon, 31 Oct 2022 18:16:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (104-178-186-189.lightspeed.milwwi.sbcglobal.net. [104.178.186.189]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id u14-20020a6b490e000000b006c1819ffe60sm3344850iob.53.2022.10.31.18.16.20 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Mon, 31 Oct 2022 18:16:20 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2022 21:16:19 -0400 From: Taylor Blau To: Patrick Steinhardt Cc: Junio C Hamano , git@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] connected: allow supplying different view of reachable objects Message-ID: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Oct 31, 2022 at 02:10:16PM +0100, Patrick Steinhardt wrote: > I guess we should thus also pay attention to `is_deepening_fetch` here. > As this means that `is_deepening_fetch` and `reachable_oids_fn` are > mutually exclusive I'm inclined to go even further and `die()` if both > are set at the same time. We only adapt git-receive-pack(1) anyway, so > we should never run into this situation for now. Yes, I agree. Thanks, Taylor