From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: [PATCH] Shallow clone: low level machinery. Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 10:22:22 -0800 Message-ID: <7vzmlcz28x.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> References: <7voe1uchet.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> <7v8xsxa70o.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> <7vmzhc1wz6.fsf_-_@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> <7vd5i81e4e.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: git@vger.kernel.org X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Tue Jan 31 19:24:17 2006 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1F409b-0002t5-5r for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Tue, 31 Jan 2006 19:22:59 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751323AbWAaSWZ (ORCPT ); Tue, 31 Jan 2006 13:22:25 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751322AbWAaSWZ (ORCPT ); Tue, 31 Jan 2006 13:22:25 -0500 Received: from fed1rmmtao01.cox.net ([68.230.241.38]:13052 "EHLO fed1rmmtao01.cox.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751324AbWAaSWY (ORCPT ); Tue, 31 Jan 2006 13:22:24 -0500 Received: from assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net ([68.4.9.127]) by fed1rmmtao01.cox.net (InterMail vM.6.01.05.02 201-2131-123-102-20050715) with ESMTP id <20060131182119.RSFI15695.fed1rmmtao01.cox.net@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net>; Tue, 31 Jan 2006 13:21:19 -0500 To: Johannes Schindelin In-Reply-To: (Johannes Schindelin's message of "Tue, 31 Jan 2006 19:06:28 +0100 (CET)") User-Agent: Gnus/5.110004 (No Gnus v0.4) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Johannes Schindelin writes: > Worse, you cannot pull from older servers into shallow repos. "have X" means different thing if you do not have matching grafts information, so I suspect that is fundamentally unsolvable. I am not sure you can convince "git-rev-list ^A" to mean "not at A but things before that is still interesting", especially when you give many other heads to start traversing from, but if you can, then you can do things at rev-list command line parameter level without doing the "exchange and use the same grafts" trickery. That _might_ be easier to implement but I do not see an obvious correctness guarantee in the approach. Implementation bugs aside, it is obvious the things _would_ work correctly with "exchange and use the same grafts" approach.