From: Stephen & Linda Smith <ischis2@cox.net>
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2015 16:18:54 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] Add a section to the users manual documenting shallow clones.
Message-ID: <2514196.BYhOBJ81ik@thunderbird>
In-Reply-To: <1450750180-1811-2-git-send-email-ischis2@cox.net>

On Monday, December 21, 2015 10:47:16 PM Eric Sunshine wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 21, 2015 at 9:09 PM, Stephen P. Smith <ischis2@cox.net> wrote:
> >  [[repositories-and-branches]]
> >  Repositories and Branches
> >  =========================
> > @@ -72,6 +71,25 @@ called the <<def_working_tree,working tree>>, together with a special
> >  top-level directory named `.git`, which contains all the information
> >  about the history of the project.
> >
> > +[[how-to-get-a-git-repository-with-minimal-history]]
> > +How to get a Git repository with minimal history
> > +------------------------------------------------
> 
> Is this a good placement for this topic? Shallow repositories are not
> heavily used, yet this placement amidst the very early and important
> topics of cloning and checking out branches assigns potentially
> significant (and perhaps unwarranted) weight to something used so
> rarely.

After some thought I think that the section should be moved near the bottom of 
"Sharing development with others" since 1) that would reduce the significance 
and 2) it seems that a shallow clone would normally be used for contributing to a 
large project when downloading the entire history is expensive.
Should it be placed just above the Tony Luk example?

sps