Re: [PATCH v3 0/5] Introduce a "promisor-remote" capability

From: Christian Couder <christian.couder@gmail.com>
Date: Dec 9, 2024, 10:40 UTC
Message-ID: <CAP8UFD3bdEo1_bg+aX52xSGxmg9KfNrpiX+2LwUM-yDqjvfZbQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <xmqqikrtnuyp.fsf@gitster.g>

On Mon, Dec 9, 2024 at 9:04 AM Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:

Show 17 quoted lines

>
> Christian Couder <christian.couder@gmail.com> writes:
>
> > This work is part of some effort to better handle large files/blobs in
> > a client-server context using promisor remotes dedicated to storing
> > large blobs. To help understand this effort, this series now contains
> > a patch (patch 5/5) that adds design documentation about this effort.
>
> https://github.com/git/git/actions/runs/12229786922/job/34110073072
> is a CI-run on 'seen' with this topic.  linux-TEST-vars job is failing.
>
> A CI-run for the same topics in 'seen' but without this topic is
> https://github.com/git/git/actions/runs/12230853182/job/34112864500
>
> This topic seems to break linux-TEST-vars CI job (where different
> settings like + export GIT_TEST_DEFAULT_INITIAL_BRANCH_NAME=master
> is used).

Yeah, in the "CI tests" section in the cover letter I wrote:

Show 5 quoted lines

> One test, linux-TEST-vars, failed much earlier, in what doesn't look
> like a CI issue as I could reproduce the failure locally when setting
> GIT_TEST_MULTI_PACK_INDEX_WRITE_INCREMENTAL to 1. I will investigate,
> but in the meantime I think I can send this as-is so we can start
> discussing.

I noticed that fcb2205b77 (midx: implement support for writing incremental MIDX chains, 2024-08-06) which introduced GIT_TEST_MULTI_PACK_INDEX_WRITE_INCREMENTAL adds lines like:

GIT_TEST_MULTI_PACK_INDEX=0 GIT_TEST_MULTI_PACK_INDEX_WRITE_INCREMENTAL=0

at the top of a number of repack related test scripts like t7700-repack.sh, so I guess that it should be OK to add the same lines at the top of the t5710 test script added by this series. This should fix the CI failures.

I have made this change in my current version.

Thanks.

Yeah, not sure why