{"thread":{"id":"35980","subject":"How to mark a complete sub-directory assume-unchanged/skip-worktree?","startedAt":"2014-02-27T16:18:14Z","lastAt":"2014-02-28T08:37:19Z","messageCount":5,"participants":["Philip Oakley","Duy Nguyen"],"isPatch":false,"patchVersion":null,"patchTotal":null},"messages":[{"id":"235483","messageId":"3A9AA61FDE124808AA25DE3511CF99F1@PhilipOakley","threadId":"35980","inReplyTo":null,"subject":"How to mark a complete sub-directory assume-unchanged/skip-worktree?","fromName":"Philip Oakley","fromEmail":"philipoakley@iee.org","sentAt":null,"receivedAt":"2014-02-27T16:18:14Z","isPatch":false,"sender":{"key":"philipoakley@iee.email","avatar":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/914343?v=4"},"body":"I'm having a long think (sickness R&R) about the possible options for a \nnarrow clone implementation.\n\nIs there currently any way in the code base that a complete\nsub-directory can be marked as 'missing' as could be the case for a\nnarrow clone? The assume-unchanged/skip-worktree are close but only\napplies to filepaths/blobs, rather than trees.\n\nAt the moment 'Cached tree' index extension does list the sha1 for \nunchanged sub-drectories for ease of creating tree's for new commits, \nbut I couldn't see if it could be (ab)used to support a narrow clone.\n\nHave there been previous attempts to look at marking sub-dirs \nas --skip-worktree, or some other sentinel value for the missing tree?\n\n---\nPhilip Oakley\n"},{"id":"235526","messageId":"CACsJy8DV2uCQbfCP=Mf2qajVAtpTZvKKeCS2H4_o6LA3B96QAA@mail.gmail.com","threadId":"35980","inReplyTo":"3A9AA61FDE124808AA25DE3511CF99F1@PhilipOakley","subject":"Re: How to mark a complete sub-directory assume-unchanged/skip-worktree?","fromName":"Duy Nguyen","fromEmail":"pclouds@gmail.com","sentAt":"2014-02-27T23:26:42Z","receivedAt":"2014-02-27T23:26:42Z","isPatch":false,"sender":{"key":"pclouds@gmail.com","avatar":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/720?v=4"},"body":"On Fri, Feb 28, 2014 at 12:25 AM, Philip Oakley wrote:\n> Have there been previous attempts to look at marking sub-dirs as\n> --skip-worktree, or some other sentinel value for the missing tree?\n\nI dealt with this by creating partial index, that only contains\nentries for interested subtrees. The index also stores the base tree\nSHA-1, so write-tree can still create (full) new trees correctly from\npartial index.\n-- \nDuy\n"},{"id":"235528","messageId":"DAC4EA00279649D6B3F4DB1B3D662BA6@PhilipOakley","threadId":"35980","inReplyTo":"CACsJy8DV2uCQbfCP=Mf2qajVAtpTZvKKeCS2H4_o6LA3B96QAA@mail.gmail.com","subject":"Re: How to mark a complete sub-directory assume-unchanged/skip-worktree?","fromName":"Philip Oakley","fromEmail":"philipoakley@iee.org","sentAt":null,"receivedAt":"2014-02-27T23:38:04Z","isPatch":false,"sender":{"key":"philipoakley@iee.email","avatar":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/914343?v=4"},"body":"From: \"Duy Nguyen\" \n> On Fri, Feb 28, 2014 at 12:25 AM, Philip Oakley \n> wrote:\n>> Have there been previous attempts to look at marking sub-dirs as\n>> --skip-worktree, or some other sentinel value for the missing tree?\n>\n> I dealt with this by creating partial index, that only contains\n> entries for interested subtrees. The index also stores the base tree\n> SHA-1, so write-tree can still create (full) new trees correctly from\n> partial index.\n> -- \n> Duy\n\nIs there a particular bit of code I'd be worth studying for the partial \nindex example to see how well it might fit my ideas?\n\n--\nPhilip \n"},{"id":"235530","messageId":"CACsJy8BJRixFno=Mb-3PGi-+JTq6RO19GdkveGdApdW8G9nKNQ@mail.gmail.com","threadId":"35980","inReplyTo":"DAC4EA00279649D6B3F4DB1B3D662BA6@PhilipOakley","subject":"Re: How to mark a complete sub-directory assume-unchanged/skip-worktree?","fromName":"Duy Nguyen","fromEmail":"pclouds@gmail.com","sentAt":"2014-02-28T00:58:54Z","receivedAt":"2014-02-28T00:58:54Z","isPatch":false,"sender":{"key":"pclouds@gmail.com","avatar":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/720?v=4"},"body":"On Fri, Feb 28, 2014 at 6:46 AM, Philip Oakley wrote:\n> Is there a particular bit of code I'd be worth studying for the partial\n> index example to see how well it might fit my ideas?\n\nMy last attempt was\nhttp://git.661346.n2.nabble.com/PATCH-00-17-Narrow-clone-v3-was-subtree-clone-tt5499879.html\nIf you're interested in the index part then see 15/17 and maybe 03/17\nand 04/17. I can try to rebase and publish the series somewhere if you\nwant to try it out.\n-- \nDuy\n"},{"id":"235557","messageId":"96570BB66BDF4E96B2A967CF9E5842A8@PhilipOakley","threadId":"35980","inReplyTo":"CACsJy8BJRixFno=Mb-3PGi-+JTq6RO19GdkveGdApdW8G9nKNQ@mail.gmail.com","subject":"Re: How to mark a complete sub-directory assume-unchanged/skip-worktree?","fromName":"Philip Oakley","fromEmail":"philipoakley@iee.org","sentAt":null,"receivedAt":"2014-02-28T08:37:19Z","isPatch":false,"sender":{"key":"philipoakley@iee.email","avatar":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/914343?v=4"},"body":"From: \"Duy Nguyen\" \n> On Fri, Feb 28, 2014 at 6:46 AM, Philip Oakley \n> wrote:\n>> Is there a particular bit of code I'd be worth studying for the \n>> partial\n>> index example to see how well it might fit my ideas?\n>\n> My last attempt was\n> http://git.661346.n2.nabble.com/PATCH-00-17-Narrow-clone-v3-was-subtree-clone-tt5499879.html\n> If you're interested in the index part then see 15/17 and maybe 03/17\n> and 04/17. I can try to rebase and publish the series somewhere if you\n> want to try it out.\n> -- \n> Duy\n> --\nThanks for that pointer. I'll look it out and see how well it matched \nmy ideas, and reflect on any differences to pick up learning points \nearly!\n\nPhilip \n"}]}