Re: support for large packs and 64-bit offsets

> "Shawn O. Pearce" <spearce@spearce.org> writes:
> 
> > Nicolas Pitre <nico@cam.org> wrote:
> > ...
> > Here's something we didn't think about, but that occurred to me today
> > when reading this series: If we move the SHA-1 table out of the index
> > and into the packfile (like we are planning) dumb commit-walkers
> > (http-fetch) will have problems.  Right now they download the
> > indexes of every available packfile to determine if they need to
> > download the corresponding packfile to obtain a needed object.
> 
> If we really care about older dumb clients, one option is to
> generate not .idx but .idx2, and have a corresponding .idx only
> to support them.  But at that point, it's probably cleaner to
> have an explicit option to produce .idx file of a particular
> version, and tell people to pack public repositories they expect
> older dumb clients to access with that option to keep things
> backward compatible.