Re: [RFC PATCH 00/13] Add bundle-uri: resumably clones, static "dumb" CDN etc.

From: Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com>
Date: Aug 6, 2021, 20:40 UTC
Message-ID: <YQ2eLRjMRnVpdGVZ@google.com>
In-Reply-To: <87h7g2zd8f.fsf@evledraar.gmail.com>

Hi,

Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote:

Show 9 quoted lines

> Or perhaps not, but they're my currently my best effort to explain the
> differences between the two and how they interact. So I think it's best
> to point to those instead of coming up with something in this reply,
> which'll inevitably be an incomplete rewrite of much of that.
>
> In short, there are use-cases that packfile-uri is inherently unsuitable
> for, or rather changing the packfile-uri feature to support them would
> pretty much make it indistinguishable from this bundle-uri mechanism,
> which I think would just add more confusion to the protocol.

Hm. I was hoping you might say more about those use cases --- e.g. is there a concrete installation that wants to take advantage of this? By focusing on the real-world example, we'd get a better shared understanding of the underlying constraints.

After all, both are ways to reduce the bandwidth of a clone or other large fetch operation by offloading the bulk of content to static serving.

Thanks, Jonathan