Re: Feedback outside of the user survey

> Garry Dolley wrote:
>> On Thu, Oct 16, 2008 at 10:32:56PM +0200, Christian Jaeger wrote:
>>  
>>> Hm, I don't see a fundamental technical problem which would prevent 
>>> one from implementing the ability to checkout only a subdirectory 
>>> into the working directory (i.e. to add options to Git to make it 
>>> reflect the working directory as being a subdirectory of what is in 
>>> Git's database). At this level I don't see anything inherently 
>>> different from SVN--except maybe for directory renames: if someone 
>>> else is renaming the directory you've checked out, what should 
>>> happend with your checkout? Git's filebased rename tracking would 
>>> just lead to everything vanishing from your checkout. I don't know 
>>> what happens in SVN, maybe it keeps track of the directory rename and 
>>> still sends you the changes of the directory you've checked out even 
>>> if it has now a different name on the server?
>>>
>>> Anyway, an unavoidable difference is that you have to always clone 
>>> the whole Git *database*. With SVN the database stays on the server, 
>>> with Git it is being cloned. Just as I expect SVN to need the whole 
>>> database to be [...]
>>>     
>>
>> Right, but I think cloning the entire git database just to get a
>> subdir is a fundamental technical problem.  It's no different than
>> git-clone + checkout + rm -rf <what I don't want in working tree>
>>   
> 
> We're in "violent agreement" here.
> 
>> In that sense, git already has support for cloning subdirectories,
>> which is why I don't think this method applies to what the original
>> post author meant when they referred to "support for cloning sub
>> directories".
>>   
> 
> I just think it's worth pointing out the difference between the working 
> dir and the database. It should be as easy to implement checking out 
> subdirectories in Git as it was in SVN (except, again, that, iff 
> directory renames should be tracked, some code would have to be written 
> to find out about directory renames, which SVN solves in a simpler way 
> by just requiring that the user specifies renames explicitely). It's 
> worth pointing out that working directory checkouts and database cloning 
> are separate operatoins and it's only the database cloning which is, per 
> definition (as it is a distributed VCS) different from SVN.
> 
>> :)
>>   
> 
> If you really wanted, I suppose you could additionally look into 
> implementing a kind of shallow cloning that only copies objects over the 
> wire which are necessary for representing the subdirectory you're 
> interested in.
>