Re: [PATCHv5 2/2] Documentation/clone: document ignored configuration variables
- From
Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com>
- Date
- Jun 16, 2017, 20:41 UTC
- Message-ID
- <20170616204109.GB133952@aiede.mtv.corp.google.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <87wp8b94gb.fsf@gmail.com>
Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 16 2017, SZEDER Gábor jotted:
Show 14 quoted lines
>> --- a/Documentation/git-clone.txt >> +++ b/Documentation/git-clone.txt >> @@ -186,6 +186,11 @@ objects from the source repository into a pack in the cloned repository. >> values are given for the same key, each value will be written to >> the config file. This makes it safe, for example, to add >> additional fetch refspecs to the origin remote. >> ++ >> +Due to limitations if the current implementation, some configuration >> +variables do not take effect until after the initial fetch and checkout. >> +Configuration variables known to not take effect are: >> +`remote.<name>.mirror` and `remote.<name>.tagOpt`. >> >> --depth <depth>:: >> Create a 'shallow' clone with a history truncated to the
[...]
Show 5 quoted lines
> But this is now cooking in pu, Junio: is it clear that this patchu > as-cooking ideally shouldn't land in next/master without the fix on top > which I mentioned in my mail above? I can just submit that as a patch on > top, but I'm confused about the current state with this cooking in pu, > so I thought I'd ask first how this should be handled.
I think it's simplest to write a patch on top that discusses --no-tags. That way, Junio (and anyone else applying the patch) has the flexibility to apply or cherry-pick this change to old branches without the --no-tags discussion and newer branches with it.
Would you like to write it (or suggest wording), or would you prefer if someone else does?
Thanks, Jonathan