Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@xxxxxx> wrote: > On Wed, 5 Mar 2008, Shawn O. Pearce wrote: > > Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@xxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > - should followtags not be the default? > > > > No. Absolutely not. > > > > The client may not want tag objects from this remote. It might not want > > those tags for all sorts of reasons. Maybe they are doing a one-shot > > pull. Maybe they don't trust this remote. Maybe they trust this remote > > but this remote is famous for 192M tags containing PDFs of photo images > > of build logs printed out on paper, then photographed on a wood table > > and finally scanned in at 600 dpi. > > Sorry, I meant to say: "should the followtags feature not be on by default > in the circumstances where we would follow tags anyway"... > > Maybe you do that, but I did not see it. Nope. followtags should be on if the client wants tags, and off if the client does not want tags. Its that simple. There's no reason for the client to disable followtags if the server will actually support it, as disabling it when you do have tags to follow will only cost you extra net latency. -- Shawn. -- 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
