> I think 01/02 in this patch series implements something that's better > & more future-proof. Thanks. Both patches are: Reviewed-by: Jonathan Tan <jonathantanmy@xxxxxxxxxx> A small note: > - packfile; any other value instructs Git to use the default algorithm > + packfile; The default is "default" which instructs Git to use the default algorithm I think we generally don't capitalize words after semicolons. Thanks for noticing that the check of fetch.negotiationAlgorithm only happens when a negotiation actually occurs - before your patches, it didn't really matter because we tolerated anything, but now we do. I think this is fine - as far as I know, Git commands generally only read the configs relevant to them, and if fetch.negotiationAlgorithm is not relevant in a certain situation, we don't need to read it. > That's awesome. This is exactly what I wanted, this patch series also > fixes another small issue in 02/02; which is that the docs for the two > really should cross-link to make these discoverable from one another. That's a good idea; thanks for doing it. > I.e. the way I'm doing this is I add all the remotes first, then I > fetch them all in parallel, but because the first time around I don't > have anything for that remote (and they don't share any commits) I > need to fake it up and pretend to be fetching from a repo that has > just one commit. > > It would be better if I could somehow say that I don't mind that the > ref doesn't exist, but currently you either error out with this, or > ignore the glob, depending on the mode. > > So I want this, but can't think of a less shitty UI than: > > git fetch --negotiation-tip=$REF --negotiation-tip-error-handling=missing-ref-means-no-want > > Or something equally atrocious, do you have any better ideas? If you wanted to do this, it seems better to me to just declare a "null" negotiation algorithm that does not perform any negotiation at all.
