Taylor Blau <me@xxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > On Thu, Mar 12, 2020 at 10:51:51AM -0700, Jonathan Nieder wrote: >> Jonathan Tan wrote: >> > Derrick Stolee wrote: >> >> >> but it appears that we rely on the "remote.<name>.promisor = true" >> >> setting instead of this extension. >> > >> > Hmm...besides giving the name of the promisor remote, the >> > extensions.partialClone setting is there to prevent old versions of Git >> > (that do not know this extension) from manipulating the repo. > > Manipulating it how? Presumably if the version of Git does not assume that sometimes missing objects are OK, its "fsck" and "repack" would become very upset when a repository lacks very many objects because the version of Git that created it assumes they can be lazily fetched, no?
