From: Duy Nguyen <pclouds@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2018 10:23:45 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 22/35] upload-pack: support shallow requests
Message-ID: <CACsJy8DhLzkxAr7oaBfb22x-bOOPxXxsKKwo5WKJ8p=19BSezg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAGZ79kauMhgP4Gjm=yVKSDGh0-WMSpNVCJRamfjnANyO5SWXTQ@mail.gmail.com>

On Thu, Feb 8, 2018 at 2:00 AM, Stefan Beller <sbeller@google.com> wrote:
>> +
>> +    deepen-relative
>> +       Requests that the semantics of the "deepen" command be changed
>> +       to indicate that the depth requested is relative to the clients
>> +       current shallow boundary, instead of relative to the remote
>> +       refs.
>> +
>> +    deepen-since <timestamp>
>> +       Requests that the shallow clone/fetch should be cut at a
>> +       specific time, instead of depth.  Internally it's equivalent of
>> +       doing "rev-list --max-age=<timestamp>". Cannot be used with
>> +       "deepen".
>> +
>> +    deepen-not <rev>
>> +       Requests that the shallow clone/fetch should be cut at a
>> +       specific revision specified by '<rev>', instead of a depth.
>> +       Internally it's equivalent of doing "rev-list --not <rev>".
>> +       Cannot be used with "deepen", but can be used with
>> +       "deepen-since".
>
> What happens if those are given in combination?

It should be described in the old protocol document or I did a bad job
documenting it. Some of these can be combined (I think it's AND logic
from rev-list point of view), with the exception of --depth which does
not use rev-list underneath and cannot be combined with the others.
-- 
Duy