From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.1 (2015-04-28) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.7 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_INVALID, DKIM_SIGNED,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.1 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1D9881F453 for ; Fri, 19 Oct 2018 02:55:26 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726542AbeJSK71 (ORCPT ); Fri, 19 Oct 2018 06:59:27 -0400 Received: from mail-wr1-f66.google.com ([209.85.221.66]:42778 "EHLO mail-wr1-f66.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726424AbeJSK71 (ORCPT ); Fri, 19 Oct 2018 06:59:27 -0400 Received: by mail-wr1-f66.google.com with SMTP id r17-v6so3411425wrt.9 for ; Thu, 18 Oct 2018 19:55:23 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=sender:from:to:cc:subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id :user-agent:mime-version; bh=9d3jzkfQxDORwPtEdKdlQU7/qCXEBrpcxv0LMyqq0Bs=; b=oS7b18JeLdJGcf/ERj1OHtHb3bkTfMoog8h85bdYcxVtAHY8mnsHGR5xs1t7K0pArD z+3Yx6fVpBTrmyYeJnKz073LKmc+jPu6kkx7tq37pev4feCGAAnTLbxyyoRxQAe6VCXD fFsS4tPF1PSVrX+roNtPncbE0ngB2/8XSE6zasKZdDehx8R3t7w517GoklN8uHAgDLao nGaI7RVSCGrS5fnt6p32yxgjtQaTt4rk+Xf5iTbZTpcXMZXeEredmxdLhq5wqBKIJwHb DS2u6QYq+1G06PA9yxf4ny3DonIdwj1wSzh9USyOSLYgtq/Ms8R5KeV0P0jpX6oP0aPr B+hw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:sender:from:to:cc:subject:references:date :in-reply-to:message-id:user-agent:mime-version; bh=9d3jzkfQxDORwPtEdKdlQU7/qCXEBrpcxv0LMyqq0Bs=; b=YcnbrXIjH+AF5pRmnJ9BykI6UdnYqNAPNb8J3Kl5QtB+df+Mlti5zK7sM8Qh+xJw91 z2FSGFHLd96dEjgus2uKoxOGicwvIZm7q3j2N59/6BZvU2U42hVFM9iSKVvkBhomPAHA 65gVIhTymFx7RfPrRKlad7LWzf7y3+Y1510+xuUwPMihlXM8RwbyYIdd1g3KV/Q15ElP T4LvZNsua19EoYMGHUlXA0JdWFAYpZYOWXa+ir7BmLU6+l5e6McYnL25Cd1EvIjvQ/ei tQnsSCjg6TR/aSShh9p0w2ieNcZLg3rTeJEI6cnGZGDdI5V7URUp6vktCJ6PuTPPnPRc 0gVA== X-Gm-Message-State: ABuFfojfR0ayjeBy2deCLOfIcxwgJV0HBucnaotkt1y6C0Y2Ah8UQwNy TfKmkPPKUwexdKrDrDK30T4= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ACcGV607B9/Ak96zP7KrLacFY+uuXTLz9dAtxn8D8KxlYjdnQJTNsTEt5NFfkSTe9XvgTc7h56c8Cg== X-Received: by 2002:a5d:4306:: with SMTP id h6-v6mr33489930wrq.189.1539917722672; Thu, 18 Oct 2018 19:55:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (168.50.187.35.bc.googleusercontent.com. [35.187.50.168]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id e14-v6sm22576795wrt.76.2018.10.18.19.55.20 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305 bits=256/256); Thu, 18 Oct 2018 19:55:21 -0700 (PDT) From: Junio C Hamano To: Jonathan Nieder Cc: Jonathan Tan , christian.couder@gmail.com, sbeller@google.com, git@vger.kernel.org, peff@peff.net, Ben.Peart@microsoft.com, pclouds@gmail.com, mh@glandium.org, larsxschneider@gmail.com, e@80x24.org, chriscool@tuxfamily.org, jeffhost@microsoft.com, sunshine@sunshineco.com, dev+git@drbeat.li Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 9/9] Documentation/config: add odb..promisorRemote References: <20181016174304.GA221682@aiede.svl.corp.google.com> <20181016222243.58620-1-jonathantanmy@google.com> <20181019003325.GA30421@aiede.svl.corp.google.com> Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2018 11:55:20 +0900 In-Reply-To: <20181019003325.GA30421@aiede.svl.corp.google.com> (Jonathan Nieder's message of "Thu, 18 Oct 2018 17:33:25 -0700") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.1 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Jonathan Nieder writes: > Junio C Hamano wrote: > ... >> It is a good idea to implicitly include the promisor-remote to the >> set of secondary places to consult to help existing versions of Git, >> but once the repository starts fetching incomplete subgraphs and >> adding new object.missingobjectremote [*1*], these versions of Git >> will stop working correctly, so I am not sure if it is all that >> useful approach for compatibility in practice. > > Can you spell this out for me more? Do you mean that a remote from > this list might make a promise that the original partialClone remote > can't keep? It was my failed attempt to demonstrate that I understood what was being discussed by rephrasing JTan's Or allow extensions.partialClone= wherein is not in the missingObjectRemote, in which case is tried first, so that we don't have to reject some configurations.