From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Yuri D'Elia Subject: Re: Thinning a repository Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2014 13:35:36 +0100 Message-ID: References: <20141130123400.GG31751@paksenarrion.iveqy.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: git@vger.kernel.org X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Sun Nov 30 13:36:00 2014 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Xv3jK-0001Sb-P1 for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Sun, 30 Nov 2014 13:35:59 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752079AbaK3Mfz (ORCPT ); Sun, 30 Nov 2014 07:35:55 -0500 Received: from plane.gmane.org ([80.91.229.3]:42830 "EHLO plane.gmane.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752038AbaK3Mfy (ORCPT ); Sun, 30 Nov 2014 07:35:54 -0500 Received: from list by plane.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Xv3jD-0001PT-IV for git@vger.kernel.org; Sun, 30 Nov 2014 13:35:51 +0100 Received: from adsl-ull-182-73.49-151.net24.it ([151.49.73.182]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sun, 30 Nov 2014 13:35:51 +0100 Received: from wavexx by adsl-ull-182-73.49-151.net24.it with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sun, 30 Nov 2014 13:35:51 +0100 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: adsl-ull-182-73.49-151.net24.it User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Icedove/31.2.0 In-Reply-To: <20141130123400.GG31751@paksenarrion.iveqy.com> Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On 11/30/2014 01:34 PM, Fredrik Gustafsson wrote: > On Sun, Nov 30, 2014 at 01:18:34PM +0100, Yuri D'Elia wrote: >> Is there a quick way to reproduce the effect of a shallow clone on a >> local repository that doesn't involve filter-branch and/or re-clone? > > I'm curious, why is it a bad thing to do a re-clone? If you clone your > local repo it would be really fast. I see no reason to involve the workspace. I would also want to keep the current remote/origin as it is. I expect a 'thin' command to be faster by not touching the workspace at all.