From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Petr Baudis Subject: Re: Hackontest ideas? Date: Tue, 29 Jul 2008 04:02:12 +0200 Message-ID: <20080729020212.GI10151@machine.or.cz> References: <20080729000103.GH32184@machine.or.cz> <7vk5f5o6em.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> <20080729011404.GI32184@machine.or.cz> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Junio C Hamano , git@vger.kernel.org To: Nguyen Thai Ngoc Duy X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Tue Jul 29 04:03:17 2008 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1KNeYW-00053O-C3 for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Tue, 29 Jul 2008 04:03:16 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752424AbYG2CCP (ORCPT ); Mon, 28 Jul 2008 22:02:15 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752687AbYG2CCP (ORCPT ); Mon, 28 Jul 2008 22:02:15 -0400 Received: from w241.dkm.cz ([62.24.88.241]:39780 "EHLO machine.or.cz" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752404AbYG2CCO (ORCPT ); Mon, 28 Jul 2008 22:02:14 -0400 Received: by machine.or.cz (Postfix, from userid 2001) id E1E0E2C4C021; Tue, 29 Jul 2008 04:02:12 +0200 (CEST) Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.16 (2007-06-09) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Tue, Jul 29, 2008 at 08:55:32AM +0700, Nguyen Thai Ngoc Duy wrote: > On 7/29/08, Petr Baudis wrote: > > On Mon, Jul 28, 2008 at 05:55:45PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > > > Petr Baudis writes: > > > > > > > (What feature in Git or a Git-related tool would you implement, given 24 > > > > hours staight and unlimited pizza supply?) > > > > > > "Use 'assume unchanged' bit to implement narrow checkout". > > > > > > I think Nguyen Thai Ngoc Duy is already working on this? (Though I think > > he does not use the assume unchanged bit; but this will be likely done > > before the end of September.) > > You are welcome to do ;) I got to narrow checkout from subtree > checkout where 'assume unchanged' bit was unapplicable so my approach > is a bit different, but probably 'assume unchanged' bit is the right > way to go. But I rather liked the elegancy of just narrowing this down to a particular subtree. Is there really a good reason to generalize this further? Petr "Pasky" Baudis