Re: [RFC PATCH v3 8/8] --sparse for porcelains

[Jakub Narebski <jnareb@gmail.com>]

Dnia czwartek 13. sierpnia 2009 14:38, Nguyen Thai Ngoc Duy napisał:
> On 8/13/09, Jakub Narebski <jnareb@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Nguyen Thai Ngoc Duy <pclouds@gmail.com> writes:
>>> 2009/8/12 Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>:
>>
>>>> It could also require core.sparseworktree configuration set to true if we
>>>> are really paranoid, but without the actual sparse specification file
>>>> flipping that configuration to true would not be useful anyway, so in
>>>> practice, giving --sparse-work-tree option to these Porcelain commands
>>>> would be no-op, but --no-sparse-work-tree option would be useful to
>>>> ignore $GIT_DIR/info/sparse and populate the work tree fully.
>>>
>>> Only part "ignore $GIT_DIR/info/sparse" is correct.
>>> "--no-sparse-work-tree" would not clear CE_VALID from all entries in
>>> index (which is good, if you are using CE_VALID for another purpose).
>>>
>>> To quit sparse checkout, you must create an empty
>>> $GIT_DIR/info/sparse, then do "git checkout" or "git read-tree -m -u
>>> HEAD" so that the tree is full populated, then you can remove
>>> $GIT_DIR/info/sparse. Quite unintuitive..
>>
>>
>> Hmmm... this looks like either argument for introducing --full option
>>  to git-checkout (ignore CE_VALID bit, checkout everything, and clean
>>  CE_VALID (?))...
>>
>>  ...or for going with _separate_ bit for partial checkout, like in the
>>  very first version of this series, which otherwise functions like
>>  CE_VALID, or is just used to mark that CE_VALID was set using sparse.
> 
> In my opinion, making an empty .git/info/sparse to fully populate
> worktree is not too bad. I wanted to have plumbing-level support in
> git so that you could try sparse checkout on your projects (possibly
> with a few additional scripts to make your life easier). Then good
> Porcelain UI may emerge later (or in worst case, people would roll
> their own sparse checkout).

Deciding whether sparse checkout should use CE_VALID only, or should it
(as it was in the very first version of series) use additional flag, 
either CE_NO_CHECKOUT, or CE_VALID_IS_USED_HERE_FOR_SPARSE_CHECKOUT ;-)
is a design decision about *plumbing-level* support.

Note that shallow clone, while using the same mechanism as grafts file,
nevertheless use separate file; so perhaps sparse checkout while using
the same mechanism as --assume-unchanged should use additional flag.


BTW. you might want to use GIT_SPARSE_FILE, similar to GIT_INDEX_FILE;
see the fact that plumbing doesn't have .gitignore not .git/info/excludes
hardcoded... well, except for --standard-excludes.  This way full
checkout would be as simple as using

  $ GIT_SPARSE_FILE= git checkout -- .

-- 
Jakub Narebski
Poland