On Wed, 14 May 2008, Linus Torvalds wrote: > Of course, the more aggressively we prune, the more we end up having to > depend on the fact that a commit that is in a pack that is marked "keep" > must *always* have everything that leads to it in that pack or others also > marked "keep". We effectively have that already (because we've always > pruned away the commits early), but it's a thing to keep in mind whenever > we prune even more aggressively. I wonder if this is a good thing. Such a rule would effectively put restrictions on how objects like big blobs could be distributed amongst many .keep packs. I just wish we're not painting ourselves in a corner. Nicolas -- 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
