> Does the code behave sensibly when the --server-option=... option is
> given and
>
> (a) the given option is not understood by the other side that talks
> protocol v2? Or
>
> (b) it turns out that the other side does not talk protocol v2?
>
> In the former case, I would expect that the
Jonathan Tan writes:
>> > Teach "clone" the same ability, except that because "clone" already
>> > has "-o" for another parameter, teach "clone" only to receive
>> > "--server-option".
>>
>> Can you give an example of what this would be used for? An example I
>> can think of might be
>>
>>
> > Teach "clone" the same ability, except that because "clone" already
> > has "-o" for another parameter, teach "clone" only to receive
> > "--server-option".
>
> Can you give an example of what this would be used for? An example I
> can think of might be
>
> git clone --server-option=pr
Jonathan Tan wrote:
> Commit 5e3548ef16 ("fetch: send server options when using protocol v2",
> 2018-04-24) taught "fetch" the ability to send server options when using
> protocol v2, but not "clone". This ability is triggered by "-o" or
> "--server-option".
>
> Teach "clone" the same ability, exc
Commit 5e3548ef16 ("fetch: send server options when using protocol v2",
2018-04-24) taught "fetch" the ability to send server options when using
protocol v2, but not "clone". This ability is triggered by "-o" or
"--server-option".
Teach "clone" the same ability, except that because "clone" already
5 matches
Mail list logo
