Re: Unresolved issues #2 (shallow clone again)

From

Jakub Narebski <jnareb@gmail.com>

Date

May 5, 2006, 15:18 UTC

Message-ID

<e3fqb9$hed$1@sea.gmane.org>

In-Reply-To

<Pine.LNX.4.64.0605050806370.3622@g5.osdl.org>

Linus Torvalds wrote:

> So what you'd get is a _really_ cut down history that doesn't contain any
> commit history at all (just distinct "points in commit history time"), but
> that _does_ contain all the objects that the commits point to.

So we would get 'skin-deep clone' rather than 'shallow' one?

-- 
Jakub Narebski
Warsaw, Poland