From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C736EC433E6 for ; Wed, 20 Jan 2021 15:22:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9908B233ED for ; Wed, 20 Jan 2021 15:22:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S2390371AbhATPKY (ORCPT ); Wed, 20 Jan 2021 10:10:24 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:60212 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S2390857AbhATPC4 (ORCPT ); Wed, 20 Jan 2021 10:02:56 -0500 Received: from mail-qk1-x72a.google.com (mail-qk1-x72a.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::72a]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 940ACC061757 for ; Wed, 20 Jan 2021 07:02:08 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-qk1-x72a.google.com with SMTP id k193so4448575qke.6 for ; Wed, 20 Jan 2021 07:02:08 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ttaylorr-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to; bh=u24B6/+rT3U7XbSs5wv8voh9+39sO/n+xVRIFPdr2Oo=; b=ogL3HmQGwWWINISyJ+CHhQQgAqCoSm1ffCEVkp9cwAT0WhsL1YwLU5buntAXRfZV1i xK74HrtWxN3SI8ZIBUiAZRgCxkno76WTDAVXb0yXZf+KxhkOjY5rZLmQkK02xbO52Uv8 Evqx22mMkYmCZYVU2lG9SF1mYzWs1QiymMdxDu26HQWNiLh5EKP9smOwWkx6zwTajm6V BxAJH/wS2EEn2vpxdErv9LY0qEEGw9z27agd3EkUA8YDVfXUva/ImoXJYL1r82ZJk4uG +gWKAb0SrEq1HhOEz0Rvh1OQ02R3VdSn7bfgT4SrNrTn1SncEOdINg/m6Kq0sVk+gQwC o7IA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:content-transfer-encoding :in-reply-to; bh=u24B6/+rT3U7XbSs5wv8voh9+39sO/n+xVRIFPdr2Oo=; b=h3wgyRK0PBxiF53Pf73hKsjcrtwy38V0Cb+y6u0veqdxaEo5+OIWdh99/Hza4aE4MG 9Znnc0IxxAUqUaORDmq+qRX7XiNjCkbWxIMZ63SdqjE8ifvbb4epqNJxJKZqgkOg9Ji4 xtwBIOCx64cMaoCV80QX0IiefKr5zTgNN6jjqDb0FggV0qLO1yWpyaxEfI1QvCR6NcrG 1nvCQAeKW26LGKof3OgfxGnHGxfmDDg2eXh0d1W3mHw8mouyX/+zTKrkmqApTYmh8A28 b0Dl2ljrQouS/270ROLrUJqzsvyYJAVageTUDdYidmkGnng+8bi4lc21EsEBytGCVfDD ZWAQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533V58NFkfSmBIBV8Bnf2ChLl2mB157YW2/oQ81Hy5uAyrLx+bcC cjEmBN2Xn/TkMEYgMtPrBN8ZHw== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyTm2rTpD3q9KxSosBTfch4wXx3jvF6Mg6eTzM7bwp89VFYJ1aqvzK6HvbQ6sv2iLYJ7Rt3yA== X-Received: by 2002:a37:bc81:: with SMTP id m123mr9725277qkf.191.1611154927846; Wed, 20 Jan 2021 07:02:07 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost ([2605:9480:22e:ff10:ed38:94a5:e78e:2d58]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id b12sm1294027qtt.74.2021.01.20.07.02.06 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Wed, 20 Jan 2021 07:02:07 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 20 Jan 2021 10:02:04 -0500 From: Taylor Blau To: =?utf-8?B?w4Z2YXIgQXJuZmrDtnLDsA==?= Bjarmason Cc: Jacob Vosmaer , git@vger.kernel.org, Taylor Blau , Jeff King Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] builtin/pack-objects.c: avoid iterating all refs Message-ID: References: <20210119143348.27535-1-jacob@gitlab.com> <20210119143348.27535-2-jacob@gitlab.com> <87lfco801g.fsf@evledraar.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <87lfco801g.fsf@evledraar.gmail.com> Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Jan 20, 2021 at 09:50:19AM +0100, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote: > It seems we might just be able to delete this code on the server-side, > per protocol-capabilities.txt: > > Clients MUST be prepared for the case where a server has ignored > include-tag and has not actually sent tags in the pack. In such > cases the client SHOULD issue a subsequent fetch to acquire the tags > that include-tag would have otherwise given the client. > > I.e. in the case where the server isn't playing along and I haven't set > "+refs/tags/*:refs/tags/*". But as the test shows we don't do that > following ourselves unless refs/tags/* is in the refspec (and then it's > not really "following", we're just getting all the tags). Reading your email, I see no reason not to do it, and that snippet from protocol-capabilities.txt makes me feel even better about doing so. I'd be happy to have Jacob's patch picked up in the meantime, but I think that this is a good direction to pursue. Thanks, Taylor