From: Philip Oakley <philipoakley@iee.org>
Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2016 07:28:44 GMT
Subject: Re: What's cooking in git.git (Mar 2016, #04; Wed, 23)
Message-ID: <54B6C1E1FE6A4BAEA07E97B7BA81EB01@PhilipOakley>
In-Reply-To: <xmqqpoukc30t.fsf@gitster.mtv.corp.google.com>


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Junio C Hamano" <gitster@pobox.com>


> Here are the topics that have been cooking.  Commits prefixed with
> '-' are only in 'pu' (proposed updates) while commits prefixed with
> '+' are in 'next'.  The ones marked with '.' do not appear in any of
> the integration branches, but I am still holding onto them.
>
> Three more minor fix-up topics are to be merged by 2.8 final, but we
> are almost there.
>
> You can find the changes described here in the integration branches
> of the repositories listed at
>
>    http://git-blame.blogspot.com/p/git-public-repositories.html
>
> --------------------------------------------------
...
> [Cooking]
>
> * jc/bundle (2016-03-03) 6 commits
> - index-pack: --clone-bundle option
> - Merge branch 'jc/index-pack' into jc/bundle
> - bundle v3: the beginning
> - bundle: keep a copy of bundle file name in the in-core bundle header
> - bundle: plug resource leak
> - bundle doc: 'verify' is not about verifying the bundle
> (this branch uses jc/index-pack and jc/maint-index-pack-keep; is tangled 
> with jc/index-pack-clone-bundle.)
>
> The beginning of "split bundle", which could be one of the
> ingredients to allow "git clone" traffic off of the core server
> network to CDN.
>
...
Hi Junio,

I think there may be a concept clash between the ideals of a 'sneakernet 
bundle' and the 'resumable clone'.

The bundle capability still needs to work easily in sneakernet mode, and my 
reading of the proposed code for V3 (split-bundle) left the impression that 
it would be very hard for the user to do the manual transport of the files 
and place the split bundle in the right places such that a local clone from 
the bundle would still work.

Part of the issue is getting the naming right so so that there is no 
confusion between the two opposing capabilities (on-line vs off-line 
transfer).

There were a few other lesser point that I'll address when I have the right 
moment to reply to their respective messages.
--
Philip