From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: RFC: Allow missing objects during packing Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2008 15:39:47 -0700 Message-ID: <7vk5enuqfg.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> References: <20080811182839.GJ26363@spearce.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, Nicolas Pitre To: "Shawn O. Pearce" X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Tue Aug 12 00:40:59 2008 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 1KSg4Q-0006JK-IN for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Tue, 12 Aug 2008 00:40:59 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752580AbYHKWjz (ORCPT ); Mon, 11 Aug 2008 18:39:55 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752231AbYHKWjz (ORCPT ); Mon, 11 Aug 2008 18:39:55 -0400 Received: from a-sasl-fastnet.sasl.smtp.pobox.com ([207.106.133.19]:49787 "EHLO sasl.smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751962AbYHKWjy (ORCPT ); Mon, 11 Aug 2008 18:39:54 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by a-sasl-fastnet.sasl.smtp.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C20615CA67; Mon, 11 Aug 2008 18:39:52 -0400 (EDT) Received: from pobox.com (ip68-225-240-211.oc.oc.cox.net [68.225.240.211]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by a-sasl-fastnet.sasl.smtp.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 35F655CA65; Mon, 11 Aug 2008 18:39:49 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <20080811182839.GJ26363@spearce.org> (Shawn O. Pearce's message of "Mon, 11 Aug 2008 11:28:39 -0700") User-Agent: Gnus/5.110006 (No Gnus v0.6) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 69EE2770-67F6-11DD-B3F8-CE28B26B55AE-77302942!a-sasl-fastnet.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: "Shawn O. Pearce" writes: > ... It seems pretty harmless to allow an object we > aren't going to transmit but that we want to use as a delta base > in a thin pack to be missing. At worst we just get a little bit > more data transfer. If the check is only about a thin delta base that is not going to be transmit, I'd agree. But I do not see how you are distinguishing that case and the case where an object you are actually sending is missing (in which case we would want to error out, wouldn't we?)