threads / patch / 11236

patchFix clone not to ignore depth when performing a local clone

Subject: [PATCH] Fix clone not to ignore depth when performing a local clone

## tl;dr

3 messages between Dec 11, 2007 and Dec 11, 2007. Diffs are folded; open one to read it.

replies: 2people: 2as markdown or json

Charles Bailey· Dec 11, 2007, 06:47 UTC · lore

When git-clone detects that it can perform a local clone it follows a path that silently ignores the depth parameter.

Presumably if the user explicitly requests a shallow clone they have a reason to prefer a space efficient clone of just the recent history so bypass the local magic if the user specifies the depth parameter.

Signed-off-by: Charles Bailey <charles@hashpling.org>
---
 git-clone.sh |    5 ++++-
 1 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)

Show changes to git-clone.sh +4 −1

diff --git a/git-clone.sh b/git-clone.sh
index ecf9d89..fb124d8 100755
--- a/git-clone.sh
+++ b/git-clone.sh
@@ -205,7 +205,10 @@ fi
 # it is local
 if base=$(get_repo_base "$repo"); then
 	repo="$base"
-	local=yes
+	if test -z "$depth"
+	then
+		local=yes
+	fi
 fi
 
 dir="$2"

-- 
1.5.3.7.2242.gcc945-dirty

Johannes Schindelin· Dec 11, 2007, 11:54 UTC · re: Charles Bailey · lore

Re: [PATCH] Fix clone not to ignore depth when performing a local clone

Hi,

On Tue, 11 Dec 2007, Charles Bailey wrote:

Show 10 quoted lines

> @@ -205,7 +205,10 @@ fi
>  # it is local
>  if base=$(get_repo_base "$repo"); then
>  	repo="$base"
> -	local=yes
> +	if test -z "$depth"
> +	then
> +		local=yes
> +	fi
>  fi

Or shorter:

- local=yes + test -z "$depth" && local=yes

Ciao, Dscho

Charles Bailey· Dec 11, 2007, 18:26 UTC · re: Johannes Schindelin · lore

Re: [PATCH] Fix clone not to ignore depth when performing a local clone

On Tue, Dec 11, 2007 at 11:54:54AM +0000, Johannes Schindelin wrote:

Show 23 quoted lines

> Hi,
> 
> On Tue, 11 Dec 2007, Charles Bailey wrote:
> 
> > @@ -205,7 +205,10 @@ fi
> >  # it is local
> >  if base=$(get_repo_base "$repo"); then
> >  	repo="$base"
> > -	local=yes
> > +	if test -z "$depth"
> > +	then
> > +		local=yes
> > +	fi
> >  fi
> 
> Or shorter:
> 
> -	local=yes
> +	test -z "$depth" && local=yes
> 
> Ciao,
> Dscho
>

Yes, I have no particular preference. I was just following the 'convention' of the -z "$origin" test a few lines above although I could see uses of both alternatives as well as instances of [...] instead of test ... .

Charles.