Parents and children of check-in [42a5ef6dd7]
|
2026-10-21
| ||
| 11:52 |
test(conformance): point the node-retention notes at zit #259
Section 5.1 permits holding out-of-cone nodes while 5.4 and 6.3 read as dropping or eliding them; zit holds them and so do we. The notes keep the rows PARTIAL until the draft says which sentence governs. check-in: 8ea7bd1ec4 user: [email protected] tags: feat/submanifest-reader, main, trunk | |
| 11:52 |
docs(conformance): name the draft sentences zit's node retention contradicts
(cherry picked from commit 1e7b5f246ef9f5af5b366140eb03e7a80227f9bb) check-in: 42a5ef6dd7 user: [email protected] tags: feat/submanifest-reader, main, trunk | |
| 11:48 |
test(sparse): pin tree-manifest holdings on aware and cone-ignorant receive
An aware clone and pull hold exactly the spines, in-cone nodes and in-cone blobs and never request or receive the remainder. Against a cone-ignorant server the requester elides exactly the blobs every F card names out of the cone and keeps every structural artifact, as zit does. Expected sets come from the origin's decks. check-in: af86aff844 user: [email protected] tags: feat/submanifest-reader, main, trunk | |