From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
To: Johannes Sixt <johannes.sixt@telecom.at>
Cc: git@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] Alternates and broken repos: A pack and prune scheme to avoid them
Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2007 12:10:39 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <7v7ikfuxfk.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200711182101.53936.johannes.sixt@telecom.at> (Johannes Sixt's message of "Sun, 18 Nov 2007 21:01:53 +0100")
Johannes Sixt <johannes.sixt@telecom.at> writes:
> On Sunday 18 November 2007 19:39, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> ...
>> I would imagine that would work as long as it can be controlled
>> when all the involved repositories are repacked and pruned, such
>> as on repo.or.cz case (but on the other hand it is not really
>> controlled well there and that is the reason you wrote the
>> message X-<).
>
> Well, I think in many situations pack and prune can be controlled. To be
> precise, if alternates are used pack and prune *must* be controlled.
> Currently, the control is very simple: "don't prune" (and I don't recall ATM
> what you must not do when you repack).
>
> Anyway, judging from the responses so far it seems that people can live
> with "don't prune" (or not using alternates) ;-)
Because my point was not "don't prune is good enough", I think
you are judging from too small number of responses (in fact,
zero).
My point was that even the existing setup that is well known to
the public (i.e. repo.or.cz) does not seem to be controlled, and
adding a nicer mechanism (e.g. I do not think there currently is
a canned way to prepare a pack that contains only unreachable
objects --- you need to script it anew) for a better control may
not help the situation much, unless it is actually used.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-11-18 20:11 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-11-18 11:25 [RFC] Alternates and broken repos: A pack and prune scheme to avoid them Johannes Sixt
2007-11-18 18:39 ` Junio C Hamano
2007-11-18 20:01 ` Johannes Sixt
2007-11-18 20:10 ` Junio C Hamano [this message]
2007-11-29 3:41 ` [PATCH/RFC] Teach repack to optionally retain otherwise lost objects Johannes Schindelin
2007-11-29 6:15 ` Junio C Hamano
2007-11-29 11:57 ` Johannes Schindelin
2007-11-29 14:21 ` [PATCH] Add "--expire <time>" option to 'git prune' Johannes Schindelin
2007-11-29 14:35 ` Johannes Sixt
2007-11-29 15:22 ` [PATCH v2] " Johannes Schindelin
2007-11-29 15:12 ` [PATCH] " Jeff King
2007-11-29 16:13 ` Johannes Schindelin
2007-11-29 20:06 ` Junio C Hamano
2007-11-29 20:59 ` Johannes Schindelin
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=7v7ikfuxfk.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org \
--to=gitster@pobox.com \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=johannes.sixt@telecom.at \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).