Re: Submodules can't work recursively because Git implements policy?
- From
- Klas Lindberg <klas.lindberg@gmail.com>
- Date
- Apr 6, 2009, 16:29 UTC
- Message-ID
- <33f4f4d70904060929r31aa5870s3d9880c8ec9afc67@mail.gmail.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <20090406145140.GG23604@spearce.org>
On Mon, Apr 6, 2009 at 4:51 PM, Shawn O. Pearce <spearce@spearce.org> wrote:
Show 5 quoted lines
> What, like a secret shadow repository that you move the objects into? > > That could be very expensive in terms of disk IO if those objects > are in large packs. You'd need to break the pack apart into the > "ok" and "sekret" parts. Ick.
Well, ok. Just popping then? Or adding the wrong publication to a forbidden fetch list?
Show 10 quoted lines
>> But anyway: If I implement support for fetching SHA keys and full >> recursive behaviour in the presence of submodules; would my patches >> automatically be rejected because of the rationale for the current >> behaviour? > > See my recent email (like ~10-15 minutes ago). It will be rejected > due to the issue that unreachable objects are subjected to GC and > you'd easily see your repository delete that data on the next "git > gc" invocation. Automatic data destruction is not something that > users come to git for.
Indeed not. But I don't want to suggest that named references shouldn't be necessary. Just that it should be possible to fetch based on the SHA key if that commit is (still) available on the remote end.
BR / Klas