Re: git-index-pack really does suck..

> On Tue, 3 Apr 2007, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
>> I don't care *what* it is conditional on, but your arguments suck. You
>> claim that it's not a normal case to already have the objects, when it
>> *is* a normal case for alternates, etc.
>>
>> I don't understand why you argue against hard numbers. You have none of
>> your own.
>
> Are hard numbers like 7% overhead (because right now that's all we have)
> really worth it against bad _perceptions_?

> The keeping of fetched packs broke that presumption of trust towards
> local objects and it opened a real path for potential future attacks.
> Those attacks are still fairly theoretical of course.  But for how
> _long_?  Do we want GIT to be considered backdoor prone in a couple
> years from now just because we were obsessed by a 7% CPU overhead?
>
> I think we have much more to gain by playing it safe and being more
> secure and paranoid than trying to squeeze some CPU cycles out of an
> operation that is likely to ever be bounded by network speed for most
> people.