Re: [PATCH 0/8] builtin-clone

[Johan Herland <johan@herland.net>]

On Friday 18 April 2008, Daniel Barkalow wrote:
> On Fri, 18 Apr 2008, Johan Herland wrote:
> > On Friday 18 April 2008, Daniel Barkalow wrote:
> > > This is my latest version, rebased approximately on current master (or 
> > > recent maint, I guess). It's missing all of Johan's stuff, which is tests 
> > > for stuff I've fixed
> > 
> > Does this mean you no longer need the tests, or that you want me to resend?
> 
> I have them, but my patch-sending process isn't set up for sending other 
> people's patches without forging their email, and I wanted to get this 
> series out, and they're not critical, so I skipped them for now.

No problem. Feel free to do whatever you like with them. :)

> > 1. Add a command-line option (and config variable?) for controlling
> >    whether "git clone" generates packed refs.
> > 
> > 2. Make "git clone" unconditionally generate packed refs.
> > 
> > Currently, I'm leaning towards (2), [...]
> > 
> > If there are good arguments for going with (1), I'd love to hear them.
> 
> I think it's fine, actually (now that you've not test corrections that 
> work for it); but I'd like to have builtin-clone land without any changes 
> in behaviour, and then get this sort of improvement.

Yes, I agree that a pure rewrite (without changes in behaviour) should be
committed first.


Have fun :)

...Johan

-- 
Johan Herland, <johan@herland.net>
www.herland.net