On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 4:30 PM, Junio C Hamano <gits...@pobox.com> wrote: > Stefan Beller <sbel...@google.com> writes: > >>>> +action = "noop" / "ls-remote" / "fetch" / "push" / >>>> "fetch-shallow" >> ... >>> If we are going in this "in-protocol message switches the service" >>> route, we should also support "archive" as one of the actions, no? >>> Yes, I know you named the document "pack-protocol" and "archive" >>> does not give you packs, but "ls-remote" does not transfer pack data, >>> either. >> >> I'll add that. Also I need to incorporate shallow in one way or another. > > This level of detail may not matter at this point yet, but it is > unclear to me why you have "fetch-shallow" as a separate thing > (while not having "push-shallow").
Right, this should have been done via plain fetch action but the mode parameter may be set to shallow,narrow or what we want. Sorry for my shortcut in thinking there. > The current infrastructure does > already allow fetching into shallow repositories without needing a > separate action that is different from "fetch" (aka "upload-pack"). > I would not be surprised if it were "I can deepn you if you want" > capability, but I do not understand why you are singling out > "shallow" as something that needs such a special treatment. > I should not have done that. I just got confused. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
