Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@xxxxxx> writes: > Hi Junio, > > On Wed, 10 May 2017, Junio C Hamano wrote: > >> * jc/bundle (2016-03-03) 6 commits >> - index-pack: --clone-bundle option >> - Merge branch 'jc/index-pack' into jc/bundle >> - bundle v3: the beginning >> - bundle: keep a copy of bundle file name in the in-core bundle header >> - bundle: plug resource leak >> - bundle doc: 'verify' is not about verifying the bundle >> >> The beginning of "split bundle", which could be one of the >> ingredients to allow "git clone" traffic off of the core server >> network to CDN. >> >> This was surrected from a "to be discarded" pile, as from time to >> time people wonder about resumable clone that can be primed without >> bothering Git servers with dynamic packfile creation, and some >> people seem to think that the topic could serve as a useful >> building block for that goal. But nothing seem to have happend. >> Unless people really want it, I am inclined to discard this topic. >> Opinions? > > The primary concern that wants to be solved by these patches is the > resumable clone, right? > > If so, I think that we may want to rethink that approach. If your > bandwidth is flakey and your repository is large, the upcoming work to > support fetching objects incrementally (there are three competing > proposals about this IIUC, hopefully they will settle into a single > approach soon) may actually be the better way forward. In short, these won't help, those who asked them to be kept a bit longer in my tree were mistaken, and nobody will miss them if I just discarded this topic? I'm all for that ;-) The smaller number of patches I need to carry around, the better. Thanks.