Hi, On Thu, 27 Aug 2009, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@xxxxxx> writes: > > > I half-agree, the code should decide which fanout scheme to use, but > > _only_ when producing new notes. > > > > I imagine that it could merge the existing notes, and try to make sure > > that there are no more blobs in a given subtree than a certain > > threshold; if that threshold is reached, it could fan-out using > > 2-digit subtrees, merging what needs merging (by concatenation) along > > the way. > > > > The natural precedence of shallower paths/longer basenames should cope > > well with that (i.e. prefer to show abcd/... over ab/cd/...). > > Oh, if the plan for merging the trees is such that it takes care of > "multiple notes pointing at the same commit" issues like you outline, > then I can see it would work nicely. > > At that point, fan-out would become merely an implementation detail, > something the end user never needs to worry about, just like what base > object is chosen to represent another object in a packfile. Oh, that's where you're coming from! Now I understand your concerns; it never occurred to me that the user should be encouraged to add notes to the tree herself. I was always under the impression that the fan-out is an implementation detail best hidden from the user. Ciao, Dscho -- 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