Hi, On Thu, 24 Jul 2008, Sverre Rabbelier wrote: > On Thu, Jul 24, 2008 at 8:53 PM, Petr Baudis <pasky@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > I don't follow how these two issues arise, if the server will do the > > pruning for you. It will just skip entering some tree objects when > > doing object traversal; why opening the git protocol or faking > > commits? This would be a simple extra capability in the protocol. > > Wouldn't that be as simple as passing a pathspec to git-rev-list? Not a > lot of overhead there I reckon. So the server would _not_ have to deflate the objects to inspect them? I thought you knew more about Git's object database. > > One question is what to do with delta chains including unwanted > > objects, but I think that given the objects' associativity for delta > > chains, this shouldn't be huge practical issues and it could be > > affordable in principle to include even unwanted objects. > > Just keep them? You'd still have to inspect the objects, which is way more work than the current code has to do. Remember: in the optimal case, upload-pack does not more than just serve the existing deltas/base objects. 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
