Re: [Question] Is extensions.partialClone defunct?

Jonathan Nieder [off-list ref] writes:

quoted

Hmm...besides giving the name of the promisor remote, the
extensions.partialClone setting is there to prevent old versions of Git
(that do not know this extension) from manipulating the repo.

Yes, so the lack of setting is a bug.

Christian, what would your prefered way be to fix this?  Should
extensions.partialclone specify a particular "default" promisor
remote, or should we use a new repository extension for multiple
promisors?

It would depend on how well versions of Git that supported one
promisor with extensions.partialClone works with a repository
initialized with Christian's multi promisors when the extension
points at only a single promisor.  Is having other/secondary
promisors meant merely to be performance thing, or would the
repository be broken if these promisors are down because some
objects are never available from the "origin" or the primary
promisor remote?  If the former, using a "default" promisor with
extensions.partialClone would be sufficient and be preferred as we
do not end up wasting a new extension, but if the latter, we would
need to prevent Git that is capable of single-promisor from touching
the multi-promisor repository with a new extension.