From: Junio C Hamano Date: Mon, 08 Aug 2016 16:11:53 GMT Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] pack-objects: Teach --use-bitmap-index codepath to respect --local, --honor-pack-keep and --incremental Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <20160808123734.GA3995@teco.navytux.spb.ru> Kirill Smelkov writes: >> > ... >> > Suggested-by: Junio C Hamano >> > Discussed-with: Jeff King >> > --- >> >> I do not think I suggested much of this to deserve credit like this, >> though, as I certainly haven't thought about the pros-and-cons >> between adding the same "some object in pack may not want to be in >> the output" logic to the bitmap side, or punting the bitmap codepath >> when local/keep are involved. > > I understand. Still for me it was you who convinced me to add proper > support for e.g. --local vs bitmap instead of special-casing it. OK, in such a case, it probably is more sensible to do it like: ... with all differences strangely showing we are a bit faster now, but probably all being within noise. Credit for inspiring this solution and discussing the design of the change goes to Junio and Jeff King. Signed-off-by: Kirill Smelkov --- builtin/pack-objects.c | 36 ++++++++++++----- t/t5310-pack-bitmaps.sh | 103 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 2 files changed, 130 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-) Don't forget your own sign-off ;-)