From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Garry Dolley Subject: Re: Feedback outside of the user survey Date: Sat, 18 Oct 2008 06:49:07 -0700 Message-ID: <20081018134906.GA13894@garry-thinkpad.arpnetworks.com> References: <2d460de70810160319r4bed8643g884508cdeba772@mail.gmail.com> <20081016115628.GA24836@garry-x300.arpnetworks.com> <2d460de70810160618u1803375aj913145a5060e5308@mail.gmail.com> <48F7A4F8.2080600@jaeger.mine.nu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Richard Hartmann , git@vger.kernel.org To: Christian Jaeger X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Sat Oct 18 15:50:55 2008 connect(): Connection refused 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 1KrCCe-0002lk-F6 for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Sat, 18 Oct 2008 15:50:48 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751501AbYJRNtN (ORCPT ); Sat, 18 Oct 2008 09:49:13 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1750819AbYJRNtM (ORCPT ); Sat, 18 Oct 2008 09:49:12 -0400 Received: from mail.arpnetworks.com ([205.134.237.79]:35612 "HELO penguin.filetron.com" rhost-flags-OK-FAIL-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1752167AbYJRNtL (ORCPT ); Sat, 18 Oct 2008 09:49:11 -0400 Received: (qmail 30842 invoked from network); 18 Oct 2008 13:47:10 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO garry-thinkpad.arpnetworks.com) (gdolley@arpnetworks.com@205.134.237.48) by mail.arpnetworks.com with SMTP; 18 Oct 2008 13:47:10 -0000 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <48F7A4F8.2080600@jaeger.mine.nu> X-PGP-Key: http://scie.nti.st/pubkey.asc X-PGP-Fingerprint: A4C2 A268 0A00 1C26 94BC 9690 4255 E69B F65A 9900 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 Thu, Oct 16, 2008 at 10:32:56PM +0200, Christian Jaeger wrote: > Hm, I don't see a fundamental technical problem which would prevent one > from implementing the ability to checkout only a subdirectory into the > working directory (i.e. to add options to Git to make it reflect the > working directory as being a subdirectory of what is in Git's database). At > this level I don't see anything inherently different from SVN--except maybe > for directory renames: if someone else is renaming the directory you've > checked out, what should happend with your checkout? Git's filebased rename > tracking would just lead to everything vanishing from your checkout. I > don't know what happens in SVN, maybe it keeps track of the directory > rename and still sends you the changes of the directory you've checked out > even if it has now a different name on the server? > > Anyway, an unavoidable difference is that you have to always clone the > whole Git *database*. With SVN the database stays on the server, with Git > it is being cloned. Just as I expect SVN to need the whole database to be > [...] Right, but I think cloning the entire git database just to get a subdir is a fundamental technical problem. It's no different than git-clone + checkout + rm -rf In that sense, git already has support for cloning subdirectories, which is why I don't think this method applies to what the original post author meant when they referred to "support for cloning sub directories". :) -- Garry Dolley ARP Networks, Inc. http://scie.nti.st Los Angeles County REACT, Unit 336 WQGK336