Re: [PATCHv5 2/2] Documentation/clone: document ignored configuration variables

["Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason" <avarab@gmail.com>]

On Fri, Jun 16 2017, SZEDER Gábor jotted:

> Due to limitations/bugs in the current implementation, some
> configuration variables specified via 'git clone -c var=val' (or 'git
> -c var=val clone') are ignored during the initial fetch and checkout.
>
> Let the users know which configuration variables are known to be
> ignored ('remote.origin.mirror' and 'remote.origin.tagOpt') under the
> documentation of 'git clone -c'.
>
> Signed-off-by: SZEDER Gábor <szeder.dev@gmail.com>
> ---
>  Documentation/git-clone.txt | 5 +++++
>  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/Documentation/git-clone.txt b/Documentation/git-clone.txt
> index ec41d3d69..5ceccb258 100644
> --- a/Documentation/git-clone.txt
> +++ b/Documentation/git-clone.txt
> @@ -186,6 +186,11 @@ objects from the source repository into a pack in the cloned repository.
>  	values are given for the same key, each value will be written to
>  	the config file. This makes it safe, for example, to add
>  	additional fetch refspecs to the origin remote.
> ++
> +Due to limitations if the current implementation, some configuration
> +variables do not take effect until after the initial fetch and checkout.
> +Configuration variables known to not take effect are:
> +`remote.<name>.mirror` and `remote.<name>.tagOpt`.
>
>  --depth <depth>::
>  	Create a 'shallow' clone with a history truncated to the

Just so we're all on the same page, in
CACBZZX740rcQKnfkRXgn0+fmeUDaWL-Kz5WzKeyUvBhXWPwPhg@mail.gmail.com I had
the feedback that this patch didn't make sense on top of 2.13.0 since we
have --no-tags now which should be documented here, but you replied in
CAM0VKjmz7MpVt3oPBuwHiXNoLkZmdmrZ66ggk+aY5-4oVkE35A@mail.gmail.com in an
answer I understood to mean that this was a patch not meant for master,
but for the main track.

But this is now cooking in pu, Junio: is it clear that this patchu
as-cooking ideally shouldn't land in next/master without the fix on top
which I mentioned in my mail above? I can just submit that as a patch on
top, but I'm confused about the current state with this cooking in pu,
so I thought I'd ask first how this should be handled.