Re: [PATCH v4 9/9] Documentation/config: add odb.<name>.promisorRemote

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Jonathan Tan <jonathantanmy@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:

>> 	[object]
>> 		missingObjectRemote = local-cache-remote
>> 		missingObjectRemote = origin
>> 
> In the presence of missingObjectRemote, old versions of Git, when lazily
> fetching, would only know to try the extensions.partialClone remote. But
> this is safe because existing data wouldn't be clobbered (since we're
> not using ideas like adding meaning to the contents of the .promisor
> file). Also, other things like fsck and gc still work.

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.


[Footnote]

*1* That name with two "object" in it sounds horrible.  I think the
same keyname in 'core' section may sit better (this feature sounds
more 'core' than other cruft that crept into 'core' section over
time).  

Or "odb.remoteAlternate" (as opposed to object/info/alternates that
are local alternates), perhaps.



[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Gcc Help]     [IETF Annouce]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Networking]     [Security]     [V4L]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Fedora Users]

  Powered by Linux