From: David Lang Date: Tue, 03 Apr 2007 22:36:01 GMT Subject: Re: git-index-pack really does suck.. Message-ID: In-Reply-To: On Tue, 3 Apr 2007, Nicolas Pitre wrote: > 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_? plus 1s overhead on what's otherwise a noop command. > 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. this is why -paranoid should be left on for network pulls, but having it on for the local uses means that the cost isn't hidden in the network limits isn't good. David Lang