From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from fout-a5-smtp.messagingengine.com (fout-a5-smtp.messagingengine.com [103.168.172.148]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 65D1F351C12 for ; Tue, 3 Mar 2026 17:05:33 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=103.168.172.148 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1772557534; cv=none; b=Hilt1AIWOYu9Kud9qQOI6lqMPf38g2ovooZoYhrUgf0CVIv+kY6J9GN2N6LkubKA1m2zG5wp5JCh0TUQxMVYuby3thyeuU934mvyLziBvA6oToyA0mtajVipdSWqJekFmpZK5BxyS9AXla+3Jj37v+1IhNWsnA4TaLw/tuM+C8Q= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1772557534; c=relaxed/simple; bh=ca+SnE+yh/FPyDwTZN2Xgu+y2Rs9ZD1D6t0IU8ksI1w=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=fdvGwcvELH0W2OLcpAcDi6Kfr8CD22PGObf/lLYT1j0kZlBWj9qbE0Cs58PoCH4gNiCF4jNEYNvmNeDm4cYO3Z9P3LA3EHVIEKolj+HmwigQwzRKIhroXfffHJBdvEx+Nr8xvG2qe0CzjhcQAPFJbmfmzX7CZ9maENAWrBj7yek= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=pobox.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=pobox.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=pobox.com header.i=@pobox.com header.b=k4n0II3d; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.i=@messagingengine.com header.b=Z4J/+M9R; arc=none smtp.client-ip=103.168.172.148 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=pobox.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=pobox.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=pobox.com header.i=@pobox.com header.b="k4n0II3d"; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.i=@messagingengine.com header.b="Z4J/+M9R" Received: from phl-compute-06.internal (phl-compute-06.internal [10.202.2.46]) by mailfout.phl.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4E65FEC0625; Tue, 3 Mar 2026 12:05:32 -0500 (EST) Received: from phl-frontend-01 ([10.202.2.160]) by phl-compute-06.internal (MEProxy); Tue, 03 Mar 2026 12:05:32 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=cc :cc:content-type:content-type:date:date:from:from:in-reply-to :in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references:reply-to:subject :subject:to:to; s=fm3; t=1772557532; x=1772643932; bh=rW6Splqoep 3o2I7O5UswqAS0JfrCmYkf//mvY5PbNSo=; b=k4n0II3dTfVUpFGFhVV+xU0WKJ 0xODZG4Gx0K+2YVxtFuiOMwlt1WoRlLLCpWd1ICoSDnCfcP6s8A06TD+xcZ5qoe6 QIzQH8CTUbfb8e0MnQD5hcCVDBU5AomJ2ffUAyw3Uhdf2vN72nNH7ISBem8dKC6M tFClAez0id34CPRyWBPPw9lNnzlF30t861+SpTz26uSgI0A+uLqv7JVzSj6sjeoG H8lg8M7pAXqSTd9juZzA0E3nwDdhEIu+qWEErAvP5ptZOVPbj72FzpKoSdDWBrKD YRNF4zbBel39NFMjfCM9bslWs0uKJD+U8ZaKxsS5aILbwpsU2hB2MX6/Hudw== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:cc:content-type:content-type:date:date :feedback-id:feedback-id:from:from:in-reply-to:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:reply-to:subject:subject:to :to:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm1; t= 1772557532; x=1772643932; bh=rW6Splqoep3o2I7O5UswqAS0JfrCmYkf//m vY5PbNSo=; b=Z4J/+M9RKwCOHul61H8qGM6IxhgE0kGF3usvkrx0ErKIHJPXkvy tQ/wtS1jNDU1fEk7sLoCmCgkWzh9B7kaFEdPirykP5nNU54fSorFHVeUfIo+jZNE NPFAo0AM96BA2ByDOPuM/1uJc1fKUY/shteFG/izeuoWJWqeYdmV9nyIUbwq0Fnw zyCPBsJZdGD4nYtpKD0k4YcBoE7tDNKYIY5VFTtH6/eivQJ13CcGMH4N6T07m5Qq cf1C3ie8NWyZacanuRlcPkUaXO324m6b1z9ekxcY8+4c0UReF3OUP1pyoYr9bvys n2KobPiMefMiE22/XiaU9Mk2cliUShQmHPA== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Received: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeefgedrtddtgddvieduudefucetufdoteggodetrf dotffvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgenuceu rghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmnecujf gurhephffvvefujghffffkfgggtgesthdtredttdertdenucfhrhhomheplfhunhhiohcu vecujfgrmhgrnhhouceoghhithhsthgvrhesphhosghogidrtghomheqnecuggftrfgrth htvghrnhepvedvffetgedugfeiieefffeghfegudekgeekfffgieehvedvudefkeejueeh ueefnecuffhomhgrihhnpegvgigrmhhplhgvrdgtohhmnecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivg eptdenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomhepghhithhsthgvrhesphhosghogidrtgho mhdpnhgspghrtghpthhtohepkedpmhhouggvpehsmhhtphhouhhtpdhrtghpthhtohepph hssehpkhhsrdhimhdprhgtphhtthhopegrlhgrnhessghrrghithhhfigrihhtvgdruggv vhdprhgtphhtthhopehgihhtghhithhgrggughgvthesghhmrghilhdrtghomhdprhgtph htthhopehgihhtsehvghgvrhdrkhgvrhhnvghlrdhorhhgpdhrtghpthhtoheptghhrhhi shhtihgrnhdrtghouhguvghrsehgmhgrihhlrdgtohhmpdhrtghpthhtohepjhhonhgrth hhrghnthgrnhhmhiesghhoohhglhgvrdgtohhmpdhrtghpthhtohepmhgvsehtthgrhihl ohhrrhdrtghomhdprhgtphhtthhopehgihhtshhtvghrsehpohgsohigrdgtohhm X-ME-Proxy: Feedback-ID: if26b431b:Fastmail Received: by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Tue, 3 Mar 2026 12:05:31 -0500 (EST) From: Junio C Hamano To: Patrick Steinhardt Cc: Alan Braithwaite , Alan Braithwaite via GitGitGadget , git@vger.kernel.org, christian.couder@gmail.com, jonathantanmy@google.com, me@ttaylorr.com Subject: Re: [PATCH] fetch, clone: add fetch.blobSizeLimit config In-Reply-To: (Patrick Steinhardt's message of "Tue, 3 Mar 2026 07:30:32 +0100") References: Date: Tue, 03 Mar 2026 09:05:30 -0800 Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Patrick Steinhardt writes: > No, you're right about this one, and I think this is a sensible thing to > want. But what I'd like to see is a bit more nuance, I guess: > > - It should be possible to specify the configuration per URL. If you > know that git.example.com knows object filters you may want to turn > them on for that domain specifically. So the mechanism would work > similar to "url..insteadOf" or "http..*" settings. > > - The infrastructure shouldn't cast any specific filter into stone. > Instead, it should be possible to specify a default filter. > > I'd assume that these settings should only impact the initial clone to > use a default filter in case the cloned URL matches the configured URL. > For existing repositories it shouldn't have any impact, as we should > continue to respect the ".git/config" there when it comes to promisors > and filters. Ahh, thanks for pointing out the flaw in my thinking that forgets that "remote..partialCloneFilter" would not work in the initial state where there is no associated with the remote repository you are trying to contact. I agree that something like "remote..particialCloneFilter" is a more proper way forward.