2 messages, 2 authors, 2016-06-15 · open the first message on its own page
From: Junio C Hamano <hidden>
Date: 2016-06-15 23:00:16
Jeff King [off-list ref] writes:
I think the main flag of interest is giving an fnmatch pattern to limit the advertised refs. There could potentially be others, but I do not know of any offhand.
One thing that comes to mind is where symrefs point at, which we failed to add the last time around because we ran out of the hidden-space behind NUL.
From: Jeff King <hidden>
Date: 2016-06-15 23:00:16
On Tue, Mar 11, 2014 at 12:32:37PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
Jeff King [off-list ref] writes:quoted
I think the main flag of interest is giving an fnmatch pattern to limit the advertised refs. There could potentially be others, but I do not know of any offhand.One thing that comes to mind is where symrefs point at, which we failed to add the last time around because we ran out of the hidden-space behind NUL.
Yeah, good idea. I might be misremembering some complications, but we
can probably do it with:
1. Teach the client to send an "advertise-symrefs" flag before the ref
advertisement.
2. Teach the server to include symrefs in the ref advertisement; we
can invent a new syntax because we know the client has asked for
it.
That does not have to come immediately, though. Done correctly,
upload-pack2 is not about implementing the fnmatch feature, but allowing
arbitrary capability strings from the client before the ref
advertisement starts. So this just becomes an extension that we can add
and advertise during that new phase.
-Peff