Dear diary, on Mon, May 22, 2006 at 11:18:07PM CEST, I got a letter where "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@xxxxxxxxx> said that... > Sean wrote: > >On Sun, 21 May 2006 16:47:45 -0700 > >"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > >>It appears that doing a *local* -- meaning using a file path or file URL > >>-- clone or fetch with cogito is just glacial when the repository has an > >>even moderate number of tags (and it's fetching the tags that takes all > >>the time.) That's a really serious problem for me. > >> > > > >Peter, does git clone work acceptably for you? > > > > Well, it does, except it doesn't set up the cogito branches (which one can > of course copy manually.) What about incremental fetches using git-fetch? From a quick scan of the git-fetch automagic tags following code, it seems to be even significantly more expensive than Cogito's (in terms of number of forks). git-clone has an advantage here since it clones _everything_ while Cogito fetches only stuff related to the branch you are cloning, and verifying if what it fetches is sensible for you unfortunately takes a lot of time. :/ I guess there is no way to verify presence of multiple objects at once and there is also no way to order local fetch of multiple objects at once. -- Petr "Pasky" Baudis Stuff: http://pasky.or.cz/ Right now I am having amnesia and deja-vu at the same time. I think I have forgotten this before. - : 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