Re: Git in Outreachy December 2019?

> > >  - In your reply [2] to the above [1], you mentioned the possibility of
> > >    keeping a list of cutoff points. One way of doing this, as I state in
> > >    [3], is my original suggestion back in 2017 of one such
> > >    repository-wide list. If we do this, it would be better for
> > >    fetch-pack to handle this instead of index-pack, and it seems more
> > >    efficient to me to have index-pack be able to pass objects to
> > >    fetch-pack as they are inflated instead of fetch-pack rereading the
> > >    compressed forms on disk (but again, I haven't verified this).
> > 
> > And this is the flip-side problem: we need to get data back, but we have
> > only stdout, which is already in use (so we need some kind of protocol).
> > That leads to things like the horrible NUL-byte added by 83558686ce
> > (receive-pack: send keepalives during quiet periods, 2016-07-15).
> 
> Sounds good. With this, do you think that there is enough likelihood of
> acceptance that we can move ahead with my proposed project?
> 
> Besides discussing the likelihood of patches being accepted/rejected,
> should we record the result of discussion somewhere (or, if only the
> mentor should give their ideas, for me to write in more detail)? I don't
> recall a place in the Outreachy form to write this, so I just mentioned
> the benefits in outline, but maybe I can just include it somewhere
> anyway.