Junio C Hamano wrote:
Paolo Bonzini <bonzini@xxxxxxx> writes:
Paolo Bonzini wrote:
Used together with [1/7], this change is Ok in a homogeneous environment,
but it would break people who use git of different vintage on the same
repository (think of a repository on a networked filesystem). You clone
like this, and older git won't grok the push configuration anymore.
It may look a very minor point, but I think it deserves mentioning.
I think it is reasonable to require cloning with the
least-common-denominator version in this case. Think of what
happened if the pack format changed.
Any news on this (and on 1/7, which is in pu)?
The pack-format change is a big deal and benefit everybody. Comparing it
with this change feels like comparing an apple and a poppy seed, doesn't
it?
Yes, but it is the same. Another example is when remotes started being
created in refs/remotes/origin upon cloning. In general, you cannot
expect a clone to be downwards-compatible (or, you should expect a clone
*not* to be downwards-compatible).
Paolo
--
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
