From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Dana How" Subject: Re: If you would write git from scratch now, what would you change? Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2007 14:02:45 -0800 Message-ID: <56b7f5510711261402s35b77879xdcb2492ea14a1791@mail.gmail.com> References: <200711252248.27904.jnareb@gmail.com> <56b7f5510711261118m7a402beah5d9cb75c1ad10b43@mail.gmail.com> <56b7f5510711261217h56214321xb7acd9851b677dd6@mail.gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: "Jakub Narebski" , git@vger.kernel.org, danahow@gmail.com To: "Nicolas Pitre" X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Mon Nov 26 23:03:12 2007 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 1Iwm2p-0002GH-8m for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Mon, 26 Nov 2007 23:03:11 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754433AbXKZWCu (ORCPT ); Mon, 26 Nov 2007 17:02:50 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754628AbXKZWCt (ORCPT ); Mon, 26 Nov 2007 17:02:49 -0500 Received: from nf-out-0910.google.com ([64.233.182.186]:60858 "EHLO nf-out-0910.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754372AbXKZWCs (ORCPT ); Mon, 26 Nov 2007 17:02:48 -0500 Received: by nf-out-0910.google.com with SMTP id g13so903023nfb for ; Mon, 26 Nov 2007 14:02:45 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; bh=4pTbyi+7vQ+gZEU9JnQycba9v9uaur7gY3DQfGgrCQ4=; b=vwNdjyujVY9wMMW46ukmOx8DtXH9UxdVk+F6qVNaML5I8NYHy1f+0ioX6FvcdjQfU1hvhqjC+0IoSpSs/2nMD7nrz+kQ4YKgVkw5f28vw6eo9Z4lIomOnSszeKUUpLcapL8GHXWzH+M3sWgw7LUHtcAliDv6vxrTqF0G1FVTPc4= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=R7MJyFopj+IU5w6QJVQeB7VpuCgAl+IcM4pQGcMuH6NpH8DP5UHPbd+OVKttViGkVSJsuI80SR6bIXvX4g+lrW10Z1Gv6z+ChBdL90IKQQDWiHO6nY8w3his4u27Q0vb8Rw9EhWxcjlwL59JaB+NAkA1frRJpcxUVZUtPMdG330= Received: by 10.78.166.7 with SMTP id o7mr3560564hue.1196114565320; Mon, 26 Nov 2007 14:02:45 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.78.177.20 with HTTP; Mon, 26 Nov 2007 14:02:45 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: Content-Disposition: inline Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Nov 26, 2007 12:55 PM, Nicolas Pitre wrote: > On Mon, 26 Nov 2007, Dana How wrote: > > On Nov 26, 2007 11:52 AM, Nicolas Pitre wrote: > > > On Mon, 26 Nov 2007, Dana How wrote: > > > Then you can do just that for big enough blobs where "big enough" is > > > configurable: encapsulate them in a pack instead of a loose object. > > > Problem solved. Sure you'll end up with a bunch of packs containing > > > only one blob object, but given that those blobs are so large to be a > > > problem in your work flow when written out as loose objects, then they > > > certainly must be few enough not to cause an explosion in the number of > > > packs. > > Are you suggesting that "git add" create a new pack containing > > one blob when the blob is big enough? > Exactly. I will think about your suggestion (and the number of packs that might result), but I confess I am surprised by it. When I proposed automatically extracting large blobs from source packs when creating a new pack under a blob size limit while pack-objects was running, you objected on the grounds that pack-objects only creates packs and should not create blobs (this proposal had other problems too, but this is the one you didn't like). Now it's OK for git-add to sometimes create packs instead of blobs? I would not have predicted that! ;-) -- Dana L. How danahow@gmail.com +1 650 804 5991 cell