Re: Unresolved issues #2 (shallow clone again)

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

 



Junio C Hamano wrote:

> The vocabulary we would want from the requestor side is probably
> (at least):
> 
>         I WANT to have these
>         I HAVE these
>         I'm MISSING these
>         Don't bother with these this time around (--since, ^v2.6.16, ...)

Wouldn't it be easier (sorry, no code yet) to have the following:

        I WANT to have these
        I HAVE these
        These are GRAFT PARENTLESS        

with the target side sending list of all parentless commits in the
info/grafts file. The source side will then do the grafting 'in memory' and
send the packs like normal, only with those cauterizing grafts in place.

Now I'm waiting for someone to say that it is too simple and cannot be done,
or that shallow clone/shallow fetch uses this method...

-- 
Jakub Narebski
Warsaw, Poland

-
: 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]