From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jakub Narebski Subject: Re: Unresolved issues #2 (shallow clone again) Date: Fri, 05 May 2006 17:18:06 +0200 Organization: At home Message-ID: References: <7v64lcqz9j.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> <7v4q065hq0.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> <87mzdx7mh9.wl%cworth@cworth.org> <7v1wv92u7o.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Fri May 05 17:19:16 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 1Fc253-0000RJ-Ur for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Fri, 05 May 2006 17:18:58 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751610AbWEEPSy (ORCPT ); Fri, 5 May 2006 11:18:54 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751607AbWEEPSy (ORCPT ); Fri, 5 May 2006 11:18:54 -0400 Received: from main.gmane.org ([80.91.229.2]:60136 "EHLO ciao.gmane.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751446AbWEEPSx (ORCPT ); Fri, 5 May 2006 11:18:53 -0400 Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1Fc24W-0000Iq-5I for git@vger.kernel.org; Fri, 05 May 2006 17:18:25 +0200 Received: from 193.0.122.19 ([193.0.122.19]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Fri, 05 May 2006 17:18:24 +0200 Received: from jnareb by 193.0.122.19 with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Fri, 05 May 2006 17:18:24 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: git@vger.kernel.org X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: 193.0.122.19 User-Agent: KNode/0.7.7 Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Linus Torvalds wrote: > So what you'd get is a _really_ cut down history that doesn't contain any > commit history at all (just distinct "points in commit history time"), but > that _does_ contain all the objects that the commits point to. So we would get 'skin-deep clone' rather than 'shallow' one? -- Jakub Narebski Warsaw, Poland