[PATCH] Add support for git option: `pack.packSizeLimit`

[Cathy Fitzpatrick]

I've prepared a revised patch that includes a new test script that, when
run, verifies the basic functionality of git-remote-gcrypt. It's not the
most comprehensive test suite every made (to put it generously), but it
generally persuades me that the patch works correctly.

I'm going to send the revised patch as a reply to this email.

Best,
Cathy Fitzpatrick

On Fri, Dec 15, 2023 at 9:17 AM Sean Whitton <spwhitton at spwhitton.name>
wrote:

> Hello,
>
> On Fri 15 Dec 2023 at 04:27am -08, Cathy J. Fitzpatrick wrote:
>
> > The standard `git-config(1)` setting of `pack.packSizeLimit` is used to
> > specify the maximum size of a pack file when repacking a repository.
> > This setting is important when working with a remote git hosting
> > provider that imposes a maximum file size on files stored on the remote
> > server. For example, GitHub currently imposes a maximum size of 100 MiB
> > per file stored on its servers.
> >
> > Until now, gpg-remote-gcrypt has ignored the `pack.packSizeLimit`
> > setting when repacking the repository. This setting has been ignored
> > because gpg-remote-gcrypt has supplied the `--stdout` flag to
> > `gpg-repack(1)`, and that flag implicitly causes `gpg-repack(1)` to
> > ignore the value of `pack.packSizeLimit`.
> >
> > This patch modifies gpg-remote-gcrypt so that it will respect the value
> > of `pack.packSizeLimit`. This is achieved by modifying the invocation of
> > `gpg-repack(1)` so that the `--stdout` argument is not supplied.
> > Instead, the pack files are written to the same temporary directory that
> > gpg-remote-gcrypt already uses for other purposes.
>
> Thanks.  I'd like to apply this.
>
> Could you give me some idea of the testing that you've done?
>
> --
> Sean Whitton
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/pipermail/sgo-software-discuss/attachments/20231216/e2adac52/attachment.htm>