Potential BC break on largefiles/lfs

[Matt Harbison]

On Wed, 19 Sep 2018 22:48:29 -0400, Martin von Zweigbergk  
<martinvonz at google.com> wrote:

> On Wed, Sep 19, 2018, 18:43 Gregory Szorc <gregory.szorc at gmail.com>  
> wrote:
>
>> Currently, the largefiles and lfs extensions monkeypatch various  
>> functions
>> so that when they encounter repository data indicative of largefiles or
>> lfs, they automagically add a repository requirement for largefiles/lfs.
>>
>
> Do I remember correctly that largefiles can also remove the requirement
> (I've forgotten the circumstance)?

I'm pretty sure it does for the `lfconvert --to-normal` command, but  
that's really just not adding it to the new repo.  I don't recall any case  
where the requirement gets removed.  (For some reason, I seem to recall  
indygreg adding the functionality to remove requirements, and mpm being  
skeptical.  But IDR the circumstances.)

> I also think that we add one for tree manifests when they're applied  
> from a
> bundle, but I think we only do that if the repo is empty. I don't  
> remember
> if there's a good reason for that. I think we simply don't know before  
> the
> cloning starts if the remote is flat or tree. I'm sure we can come up  
> with
> a way of letting the client know that earlier.