Junio C Hamano <junkio@xxxxxxx> wrote: > Shawn Pearce <spearce@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > > > I think the better thing to do here is to not repack objects which > > are already contained in very large packs. Just leave them be. > > I've been thinking about updating rev-list so that repack > can be used to organize packs into zero or more "archive packs" > and one "active pack". > > repack without -a essentially boils down to: > > rev-list --objects --all --unpacked | > pack-objects $new_pack > > which picks up all live loose objects and create a new pack. > > If rev-list had an extention that lets you say > > rev-list --objects --all --unpacked=$active_pack | > pack-objects $new_pack Hmm. Seems very reasonable actually. :-) How do we pick the "active pack" in git-repack.sh? How about "--include-pack=$active_pack" instead of "--unpacked=$active_pack"? The latter just reads really funny to me. -- Shawn. -- VGER BF report: S 0.9993 - To unsubscribe from this list: 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