Re: Performance issue of 'git branch'

> 2009/7/26 Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de>:
>> Hi,
>>
>> On Sun, 26 Jul 2009, Mike Hommey wrote:
>>
>>> On Sat, Jul 25, 2009 at 02:02:19PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > On Sat, 25 Jul 2009, Mike Hommey wrote:
>>> >
>>> > > On Sat, Jul 25, 2009 at 09:57:39PM +0300, Timo Hirvonen wrote:
>>> > > > Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > So curl really must die. It may not matter for the expensive operations,
>>> > > > > but a lot of scripting is about running all those "cheap" things that just
>>> > > > > add up over time.
>>> > > >
>>> > > > SELinux is the problem, not curl.
>>> > >
>>> > > I think it's NSS, the problem, not SELinux. Linus's libcurl is built
>>> > > against NSS, which is the default on Fedora.
>>> >
>>> > Well, it kind of doesn't matter. The fact is, libcurl is a bloated
>>> > monster, and adds zero to 99% of what git people do.
>>>
>>> Especially consideting the http transport fails to be useful in various
>>> scenarios.
>>
>> I beg your pardon?  Maybe "s/useful/desirable/"?
>>
>> In many scenarios, http transport is the _last resort_ against overzealous
>> administrators.  The fact that you might be lucky enough not to need that
>> resort is a blessing, and does not give you the right to ridicule those
>> who are unfortunate enough not to share your good luck.
>
> I think he meant that it is buggy and does not work correctly in
> various scenarios.
>
> Eg: Last I checked it couldn't handle repos where the main branch
> wasn''t called master, and I've seen other messages that make me think
> it doesn't work correctly on edge cases.