Re: [PATCH] Allow "clone --dissociate" to dissociate from alternates
- From
Alexander Riesen <alexander.riesen@cetitec.com>
- Date
- Oct 21, 2015, 08:13 UTC
- Message-ID
- <56274922.80007@cetitec.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <561FBA48.3050609@cetitec.com>
Reminder. Is this (or rather the one I'm replying to) patch a better option?
Regards, Alex
On 10/15/2015 04:38 PM, Alexander Riesen wrote:
Show 30 quoted lines
> The option requiring the explicit reference repositories is a bit of overkill: > the alternates in the original repository *are* reference repositories and > would be dissociated from should one pass any reference repository (even an > unrelated one). > > Signed-off-by: Alex Riesen <raa.lkml@gmail.com> > --- > > On 10/15/2015 04:11 PM, Johannes Schindelin wrote: >> On Thu, 15 Oct 2015, Alexander Riesen wrote: > > > >> The "--dissociate" option required reference repositories, which sometimes > >> demanded a look into the objects/info/alternates by the user. As this > >> is something which can be figured out automatically, do it in the > >> clone unless there is no other reference repositories. > > > > Would it not make sense to reuse the copy_alternates() function to simply > > copy the alternates and let `--dissociate` run its course with the copied > > .objects/info/alternate file? That would make for less new code... > > IIUC, I should validate the alternates in the source repository... > But, the only thing the user looses if it is not validated, is the nice > warning regarding no reference repositories to dissociate from, right? > > So maybe we can just remove the reset of option_dissociate and be done with > it? I would actually suggest removing the warning as well: the alternates are > something to dissociate from. And I see no harm otherwise. > > How about this instead? >