Re: Alternates and push
- From
- Jan Hudec <bulb@ucw.cz>
- Date
- Sep 7, 2008, 18:49 UTC
- Message-ID
- <20080907184922.GA3909@efreet.light.src>
- In-Reply-To
- <7viqt9rvwm.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org>
On Sat, Sep 06, 2008 at 11:06:49 -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
Show 17 quoted lines
> Theodore Tso <tytso@MIT.EDU> writes: > > > Long-standing mis-feature in git's logic in deciding what to push. > > It's been reported a few times, but apparently it's hard to fix, or at > > least it never hsa been fixed as far as I know. > > This comes from an early (mis)design of git. > [...] > * The existing alternates mechanism is not about alternate repositories. > It is about alternate object stores. That is why each line of this > file points at "objects" directory elsewhere, not the ".git" directory > that is typically at one level above that "objects" directory. > > The fact your repository's object store points at the object store that > happens to be inside Linus's repository does not imply that Linus's > object store is associated with refs in Linus's repository in any way > (that's the early _mis_design part).
Why is this a *mis*design? Couldn't push be fixed by redesigning it's protocol along the lines of: - clients sends a list of sha1s it wants to push, from the tip down - server stops it when it sees an object it has -- this check can be done against the object store without having a ref for it.
Regards, Jan
-- Jan 'Bulb' Hudec <bulb@ucw.cz>