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

LFS mirroring support for legacy batch _links responses #31512

Closed
rremer opened this issue Jun 27, 2024 · 0 comments · Fixed by #31513
Closed

LFS mirroring support for legacy batch _links responses #31512

rremer opened this issue Jun 27, 2024 · 0 comments · Fixed by #31513
Labels
type/proposal The new feature has not been accepted yet but needs to be discussed first.
Milestone

Comments

@rremer
Copy link
Contributor

rremer commented Jun 27, 2024

Feature Description

There are LFS server implementations in the wild which have batch API responses in an older/deprecated schema. Recent versions of Jfrog Artifactory, as well as Microsoft TFS cannot have their LFS objects mirrored into Gitea because they serve a batch API and the 'download' action in responses is not honored because it's under the field _links instead of actions.

The most recent version of git-lfs still supports this 'deprecated' field: https://github.com/git-lfs/git-lfs/blob/main/tq/transfer.go#L56 , so a git lfs pull would work from one of the servers above using the native client, but not with Gitea.

I believe Gitea should support both fields to keep parity with native git-lfs clients until such time as they deprecate it (forcing servers like Artifactory to update their responses).

Screenshots

No response

@rremer rremer added the type/proposal The new feature has not been accepted yet but needs to be discussed first. label Jun 27, 2024
@lunny lunny added this to the 1.23.0 milestone Jun 28, 2024
@lunny lunny closed this as completed in df805d6 Jun 28, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
type/proposal The new feature has not been accepted yet but needs to be discussed first.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants