Re: Unresolved issues #2 (shallow clone again)

Previous thread: Re: Unresolved issues #2 by Jakub Narebski on Sunday, May 7, 2006 - 4:38 am. (2 messages)

Next thread: [PATCH] Sparse fix for builtin-diff by Peter Hagervall on Sunday, May 7, 2006 - 7:50 am. (2 messages)
From: Jakub Narebski
Date: Sunday, May 7, 2006 - 6:30 am

Wouldn't it be easier (sorry, no code yet) to have the following:

        I WANT to have these
        I HAVE these
        These are GRAFT PARENTLESS        

with the target side sending list of all parentless commits in the
info/grafts file. The source side will then do the grafting 'in memory' and
send the packs like normal, only with those cauterizing grafts in place.

Now I'm waiting for someone to say that it is too simple and cannot be done,
or that shallow clone/shallow fetch uses this method...

-- 
Jakub Narebski
Warsaw, Poland

-

From: Junio C Hamano
Date: Sunday, May 7, 2006 - 7:54 pm

I think that is essentially the outline of shallow clone
proposal, except that you have to be careful and take not just
"parentless" but other grafts (e.g. one that removes one parent
from a merge commit to pretend that a side branch did not exist)
into account as well.  I do not remember if I already coded it
or not -- I might have.

-

Previous thread: Re: Unresolved issues #2 by Jakub Narebski on Sunday, May 7, 2006 - 4:38 am. (2 messages)

Next thread: [PATCH] Sparse fix for builtin-diff by Peter Hagervall on Sunday, May 7, 2006 - 7:50 am. (2 messages)