Carlos Martín Nieto <cmn@xxxxxxxx> writes: > Hi all, > > This comes as a result of the discussion starting at [0] about > git-push assuming that a server will always support thin packs. Most > out there in fact do, but this isn't necessarily the case. > > Some implementations may not have support for it yet, or the server > might be running in an environment where it is not feasible for it to > try to fill in the missing objects. > > Jonathan and Duy mentioned that separate patches for receive-pack and > send-pack could let us work around adding this at such a late stage, > so here they are. The second patch can maybe lie in waiting for a > while. I'll queue these for now, but I doubt the wisdom of this series, given that the ship has already sailed long time ago. Currently, no third-party implementation of a receiving end can accept thin push, because "thin push" is not a capability that needs to be checked by the current clients. People will have to wait until the clients with 2/2 patch are widely deployed before starting to use such a receiving end that is incapable of "thin push". Wouldn't the world be a better place if instead they used that time waiting to help such a third-party receiving end to implement "thin push" support? -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html