Re: If you would write git from scratch now, what would you change?
- From
- Dana How <danahow@gmail.com>
- Date
- Nov 26, 2007, 22:02 UTC
- Message-ID
- <56b7f5510711261402s35b77879xdcb2492ea14a1791@mail.gmail.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <alpine.LFD.0.99999.0711261529080.9605@xanadu.home>
On Nov 26, 2007 12:55 PM, Nicolas Pitre <nico@cam.org> wrote:
Show 13 quoted lines
> On Mon, 26 Nov 2007, Dana How wrote: > > On Nov 26, 2007 11:52 AM, Nicolas Pitre <nico@cam.org> wrote: > > > On Mon, 26 Nov 2007, Dana How wrote: > > > Then you can do just that for big enough blobs where "big enough" is > > > configurable: encapsulate them in a pack instead of a loose object. > > > Problem solved. Sure you'll end up with a bunch of packs containing > > > only one blob object, but given that those blobs are so large to be a > > > problem in your work flow when written out as loose objects, then they > > > certainly must be few enough not to cause an explosion in the number of > > > packs. > > Are you suggesting that "git add" create a new pack containing > > one blob when the blob is big enough? > Exactly.
I will think about your suggestion (and the number of packs that might result), but I confess I am surprised by it.
When I proposed automatically extracting large blobs from source packs when creating a new pack under a blob size limit while pack-objects was running, you objected on the grounds that pack-objects only creates packs and should not create blobs (this proposal had other problems too, but this is the one you didn't like).
Now it's OK for git-add to sometimes create packs instead of blobs? I would not have predicted that!
;-)
-- Dana L. How danahow@gmail.com +1 650 804 5991 cell