Re: Unresolved issues #2 (shallow clone again)

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 5/6/06, Junio C Hamano <junkio@xxxxxxx> wrote:
"Martin Langhoff" <martin.langhoff@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
>
> It means that for a merge or checkout involving stuff we "don't have",
> it's trivial to know we are missing, and so we can  attempt a fetch of
> the missing objects or tell the user how to request them them before
> retrying.
>
> And in any case commits and trees are lightweight and compress well...

Commit maybe, but is this based on a hard fact?

No hard facts here :( but I think it's reasonable to assume that the
trees delta/compress reasonably well, as a given commit will change
just a few entries in each tree.

I might try and hack a shallow local clone of the kernel and pack it
tightly to see what it yields.

cheers,



martin
-
: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Gcc Help]     [IETF Annouce]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Networking]     [Security]     [V4L]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Fedora Users]