Shawn O. Pearce <spearce <at> spearce.org> writes: > > Martin Langhoff <martin.langhoff <at> gmail.com> wrote: > > Here is my attempt at a "let's publish a shallow repository for branch > > of moodle". Let me show you what I did... > ... > > # 1.7 was a significant release, anything earlier than that > > # is just not interesting -- even for pickaxe/annotate purposes > > # so add a graft point right at the branching point. > ... > > Is this kind of workflow (or a variation of it) supported? For this to > > work, we should communicate the grafts in some push operations and > > read them in clone ops - and perhaps in fetch too. > > Currently the grafts file isn't transferred over any transport > protocol as it is considered to be local only to the repository. > > For one thing, grafts are a security risk. Any user can graft > anything in at any position and log/blame operations will honor > the graft, rather than what is stored in the signed commit chain. > Its a low risk, but it allows a peer to lie to you and give you > something other than what you asked for. > Would it make sense to differentiate two types of grafts, just like we differentiate two kind of tags? Then there could be "annotated grafts objects" that could be optionally signed and that would get transferred on clones, fetches, pushes, etc. Sergio -- 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
