Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Filters from promisor remotes (partial clone) should be listed by git remote -v #1211

Closed
phil-blain opened this issue Apr 9, 2022 · 1 comment
Labels
good first issue Good for newcomers

Comments

@phil-blain
Copy link

It would be nice for promisor remotes to be identified as such in the output of git remove -v, something like this maybe:

$ git config --get remote.origin.partialCloneFilter
blob:none
$ git remote -v
origin	git@github.com:phil-blain/github-docs (fetch) [blob:none]
origin	git@github.com:phil-blain/github-docs (push)
@dscho dscho added the good first issue Good for newcomers label Apr 19, 2022
@phil-blain phil-blain changed the title Filters from promisor remotes (partial clone) should be listed by git remove -v Filters from promisor remotes (partial clone) should be listed by git remote -v Apr 22, 2022
@Abhra303
Copy link

I have created a PR ( #1227 ) addressing the issue. Kindly look at it when you're free :)

Abhra303 added a commit to Abhra303/git that referenced this issue May 9, 2022
`git remote -v` (`--verbose`) lists down the names of remotes along with
their URLs. It would be beneficial for users to also specify the filter
types for promisor remotes. Something like this -

	origin	remote-url (fetch) [blob:none]
	origin	remote-url (push)

Teach `git remote -v` to also specify the filters for promisor remotes.

Closes: gitgitgadget#1211
Signed-off-by: Abhradeep Chakraborty <chakrabortyabhradeep79@gmail.com>
@dscho dscho closed this as completed in ef6d15c May 26, 2022
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
good first issue Good for newcomers
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

3 participants