Re: [PATCH v7 0/3] Cloning with remote unborn HEAD
- From
Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
- Date
- Feb 5, 2021, 16:15 UTC
- Message-ID
- <YB1vMcR1hYie1XLb@coredump.intra.peff.net>
- In-Reply-To
- <xmqq5z372ihm.fsf@gitster.c.googlers.com>
On Thu, Feb 04, 2021 at 09:25:57PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:
Show 22 quoted lines
> Jonathan Tan <jonathantanmy@google.com> writes: > > > For what it's worth, here's v7 with advertise/allow/ignore and by > > default, advertise. I think that some server operators will have use for > > this feature, and people who want to disable it for whatever reason can > > still do so. The main disadvantage is complexity - the server knob that > > server administrators will need to control (but between a simpler > > allow/ignore knob and a more complicated advertise/allow/ignore knob, I > > think we might as well go for the slightly more complex one) and > > complexity in the code (but now that is constrained to one function and > > a few global variables). > > > > As you can see from the range-diff, not much has changed from v6. > > > > I've also included Junio's suggestion of tightening the promise made by > > the server (when the client says "unborn"). > > This looks reasonable overall, especially with the feature turned on > by default, we'd hopefully get reasonable exposure from the get-go. > > Let's mark the topic to be merged to 'next' soonish, unless people > object.
No objection here. I sent a few comments in response to patch 1; the doc fix and the leak are probably worth addressing before it hits next. I couldn't help express my thoughts on the protocol wording, but it may be best to ignore me. ;)
Thanks for working on this, Jonathan. I think it's a very useful feature.
-Peff