From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2018 02:55:20 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 9/9] Documentation/config: add odb.<name>.promisorRemote
Message-ID: <xmqqftx23asn.fsf@gitster-ct.c.googlers.com>
In-Reply-To: <20181019003325.GA30421@aiede.svl.corp.google.com>

Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com> writes:

> Junio C Hamano wrote:
> ...
>> It is a good idea to implicitly include the promisor-remote to the
>> set of secondary places to consult to help existing versions of Git,
>> but once the repository starts fetching incomplete subgraphs and
>> adding new object.missingobjectremote [*1*], these versions of Git
>> will stop working correctly, so I am not sure if it is all that
>> useful approach for compatibility in practice.
>
> Can you spell this out for me more?  Do you mean that a remote from
> this list might make a promise that the original partialClone remote
> can't keep?

It was my failed attempt to demonstrate that I understood what was
being discussed by rephrasing JTan's

    Or allow extensions.partialClone=<R> wherein <R> is not in the
    missingObjectRemote, in which case <R> is tried first, so that
    we don't have to reject some configurations.