Re: Git-aware HTTP transport
- From
Shawn O. Pearce <spearce@spearce.org>
- Date
- Aug 26, 2008, 17:03 UTC
- Message-ID
- <20080826170315.GH26523@spearce.org>
- In-Reply-To
- <alpine.LFD.1.10.0808261255570.1624@xanadu.home>
Nicolas Pitre <nico@cam.org> wrote:
Show 10 quoted lines
> On Mon, 25 Aug 2008, david@lang.hm wrote: > > > and for cloneing (and especially thing like linux-next where you essentially > > re-clone daily) letting the pack get cached is probably a very good thing. > > I hope that people recloning linux-next daily are very few. This is an > incredible waste of bandwidth, regardless of the protocol used, dumb or > not. A standard fetch with a remote tracking branch (with -f or with a > plus sign on the "fetch" line in your config file) should be all that's > needed to significantly reduce the amount of data needed to transfer.
Or at least clone with --reference. You get about the same benefit if your local reference repository is fairly current, say with a stable upstream like Linus' own tree.
-- Shawn.