Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@xxxxxxxxx> writes: >> Sounds good to me. I'm not very creative, so I think I'd just use >> "non-skipping" as the new name. > > I can't think of a better one either (aside from my already-suggested > "exhaustive"), but that's naming it in terms of the only other > negotiator. Skipping and the other one are both commit graph walkers. The traditional one reports each and every commit without skipping, so if the negation in "non-skipping" turns out to be problematic in naming, perhaps we can say "consecutive" vs "skipping" as the differentiator between the two? > E.g. if we were to make one called "smart-topology" or something (would > skip sending some OIDs by assuming things about branch/tag topology, > i.e. if you have X that probably includes Y) having negotiators "A", > "non-A", and "C" would be odd :) It is good to anticipate that somebody cleverly invents negotiator that is not based on "commit walker" concept ;-)
