On Sun, Jan 22 2023, René Scharfe wrote:

Am 22.01.23 um 08:48 schrieb Jeff King:

quoted

We probably also should outright reject gigantic trees,
which closes out a whole class of integer truncation problems. I know
GitHub has rejected trees over 100MB for years for this reason.

Makes sense.

I really don't think it does, let's not forever encode arbitrary limits
in the formats because of transitory implementation details.

Those sort of arbitrary limits are understandable for hosting providers,
and a sensible trade-off on that front.

But for git as a general tool? I'd like to be able to throw whatever
garbage I've got locally at it, and not have it complain.

We already have a deluge of int v.s. unsigned int v.s. size_t warnings
that we could address, we're just choosing to suppress them
currently. Instead we have hacks like cast_size_t_to_int().

Those sorts of hacks are understandable as band-aid fixes, but let's
work on fixing the real causes.