Re: git clone --depth: shallow clone problems

> On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 9:54 PM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:
>> Duy Nguyen <pclouds@gmail.com> writes:
>>
>>>  --unshallow::
>>> -     If the source repository is complete, convert a shallow
>>> -     repository to a complete one, removing all the limitations
>>> +     If the source repository is complete, convert all shallow
>>> +     refs to complete ones, removing all the limitations
>>
>> Define "shallow ref", or better yet explain without introducing such
>> a new term (I do not think shallow-ness is a property of a ref, by
>> the way---I think you meant all refs that can reach the points the
>> history is cauterised by .git/shallow, but we shouldn't assume that
>> the target audience of this paragraph to know Git as well as I do).
>
> OK maybe
>
> Make sure all existing refs have the same history as the ones from the
> source repository. If the source repository is complete, this removes
> all limitations imposed by shallow repositories.

>>> ++
>>> +Note that if the repository is created with --single-branch, which is
>>> +default for a shallow clone, only one ref is completed. `--unshallow`
>>> +does not fetch all remaining refs from source repository.
>>
>> I do not think this "Note" is being as helpful as it could be.
>>
>>  - If the repository was created with --single-branch but if the
>>    user later fetched and started tracking other branches, the
>>    statement "only one ref is completed" is untrue; the true version
>>    is "only the existing refs are completed", which leads to a more
>>    important point.  It says the same thing as "all existing refs"
>>    above and does not add any useful information.
>>
>>  - The last sentence is less than useful but merely frustrating---it
>>    says what you cannot do with this option, strongly hints that the
>>    writer of the sentence knows what the reader wants to achieve,
>>    but without saying what other way the reader go to achieve it.
>>
>> Perhaps replace that Note paragraph with something along this line?
>>
>>     +
>>     By fetching and tracking refs that you haven't been tracking,
>>     you can add these new refs to "all refs" to be unshallowed.
>
> It was meant to emphasize --unshallow would not create a true clone,
> if people miss the keywords "all existing" refs.. Maybe..