Re: [QUESTION] about .git/info/grafts file

From: Franck <vagabon.xyz@gmail.com>
Date: Jan 19, 2006, 13:31 UTC
Message-ID: <cda58cb80601190531q238a8f40r@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <43CF739F.2030204@op5.se>

2006/1/19, Andreas Ericsson <ae@op5.se>:

Show 23 quoted lines

> Junio C Hamano wrote:
> > Franck <vagabon.xyz@gmail.com> writes:
> >
> >
> >>I'm wondering why the "grafts" files is not involved during
> >>push/pull/clone operations ?
> >
> >
> > Commit ancestry grafting is a local repository issue and even if
> > you manage to lie to your local git that 300,000th commit is the
> > epoch, the commit object you send out to the downloader would
> > record its true parent (or parents, if it is a merge), so the
> > downloader would want to go further back.  And no, rewriting
> > that commit and feeding a parentless commit to the downloader is
> > not an option, because such a commit object would have different
> > object name and unpack-objects would be unhappy.
> >
>
>
> I'm a bit curious about how this was done for the public kernel repo.
> I'd like to import glibc to git, but keeping history since 1972 seems a
> bloody waste, really.
>

That's exactly my point. Futhermore make your downloaders import that useless history spread this waste.

I guess kernel repo will encounter this problem in short term. It's being bigger and bigger and developpers may be borred to deal with so many useless objects. But I'm not saying that it's bad thing to keep that history. It just would be nice to allow developpers that don't care about old history to get rid of it.

Thanks
--
               Franck