Re: [PATCH v2 00/16] First class shallow clone
- From
Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
- Date
- Jul 23, 2013, 04:08 UTC
- Message-ID
- <7vy58x9aus.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>
- In-Reply-To
- <CACsJy8AJjXMATEPrAgSYOgpZcR_khC=9S28H8LuCvuTuJk0x8w@mail.gmail.com>
Duy Nguyen <pclouds@gmail.com> writes:
Show 7 quoted lines
> This one, on the other hand, changes the "shape" of the repo (now with > holes) and might need to go through the same process we do with this > series. Maybe we should prepare for it now. Do you have a use case for > size-based filtering? What can we do with a repo with some arbitrary > blobs missing? Another form of this is narrow clone, where we cut by > paths, not by blob size. Narrow clone sounds more useful to me because > it's easier to control what we leave out.
I was about to say "Hear, hear", but then stopped with a question to myself: why are these "some people do not want them" paths in the same repository in the first place?