On Jan 4, 2008 10:15 AM, Jan Hudec <bulb@xxxxxx> wrote: > Now to keep it stateless, I thought that: ... > This would guarantee, that when you want n revisions, you make at most > log2(n) requests and get at most 2*n revisions (well, the requests are for That is still a lot! How about, for each ref - Client sends a POST listing the ref and the latest related commit it has that the server is likely to have (from origin/heads/<ref>). Optionally, it can provide a blacklist of <treeish> (where every object refered is known) and blob sha1s. - Server sends the new sha1 of the ref, and a thin pack that covers the changes - The client can disconnect to stop the transaction. For example -- if it sees the sha1 of a huge object that it already has. It can re-request, with a blacklist. A good number of objects will be sent unnecesarily - with no option to the client to say "I have this" - but by using the hint of letting the server know we have origin/heads/<ref> I suspect that it will be minimal. Also: - It will probably be useful to list all the refs the client knows from that server in the request. - If the ref has changed with a non-fast-forward, the server needs to say so, and provide a listing of the commits. As soon as the client spots a common commit, it can close the connection -- it now knows what ref to tell the server about in a subsequent command. This way, you ideally have 1 request per ref, 2 if it has been rebased/rewound. This can probably get reorganised to do several refs in one request. cheers, m - 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
