threads / patch / 2705

patchgit-clone --shared should imply --local

Subject: [PATCH] git-clone --shared should imply --local

## tl;dr

4 messages between Nov 29, 2005 and Nov 29, 2005. Diffs are folded; open one to read it.

replies: 3people: 2as markdown or json

Pavel Roskin· Nov 29, 2005, 06:20 UTC · lore

The "--shared" option to git-clone is silently ignored if "--local" is not specified. The manual doesn't mention such dependency. Make "--shared" imply "--local".

Signed-off-by: Pavel Roskin <proski@gnu.org>

Show changes to git-clone.sh +1 −1

diff --git a/git-clone.sh b/git-clone.sh
index c09979a..699205e 100755
--- a/git-clone.sh
+++ b/git-clone.sh
@@ -73,7 +73,7 @@ while
 	*,-n) no_checkout=yes ;;
 	*,-l|*,--l|*,--lo|*,--loc|*,--loca|*,--local) use_local=yes ;;
         *,-s|*,--s|*,--sh|*,--sha|*,--shar|*,--share|*,--shared) 
-          local_shared=yes ;;
+          local_shared=yes; use_local=yes ;;
 	*,-q|*,--quiet) quiet=-q ;;
 	1,-u|1,--upload-pack) usage ;;
 	*,-u|*,--upload-pack)

-- 
Regards,
Pavel Roskin

Junio C Hamano· Nov 29, 2005, 07:08 UTC · re: Pavel Roskin · lore

Re: [PATCH] git-clone --shared should imply --local

Pavel Roskin <proski@gnu.org> writes:

Show 5 quoted lines

> The "--shared" option to git-clone is silently ignored if "--local" is
> not specified.  The manual doesn't mention such dependency.  Make
> "--shared" imply "--local".
>
> Signed-off-by: Pavel Roskin <proski@gnu.org>

Hmph, then probably the manual should say it implies it...

Pavel Roskin· Nov 29, 2005, 07:17 UTC · re: Junio C Hamano · lore

Re: [PATCH] git-clone --shared should imply --local

On Mon, 2005-11-28 at 23:08 -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:

Show 9 quoted lines

> Pavel Roskin <proski@gnu.org> writes:
> 
> > The "--shared" option to git-clone is silently ignored if "--local" is
> > not specified.  The manual doesn't mention such dependency.  Make
> > "--shared" imply "--local".
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Pavel Roskin <proski@gnu.org>
> 
> Hmph, then probably the manual should say it implies it...

Actually, from the user point of view --local and --shared are alternatives to each other and to the default behavior. --local copies files, --shared makes a reference.

Saying that --shared implies --local could sound like git-clone would still copy all objects.

My description was from the implementation point of view.

-- 
Regards,
Pavel Roskin

Junio C Hamano· Nov 29, 2005, 07:52 UTC · re: Pavel Roskin · lore

Re: [PATCH] git-clone --shared should imply --local

Pavel Roskin <proski@gnu.org> writes:

Show 19 quoted lines

> On Mon, 2005-11-28 at 23:08 -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>> Pavel Roskin <proski@gnu.org> writes:
>> 
>> > The "--shared" option to git-clone is silently ignored if "--local" is
>> > not specified.  The manual doesn't mention such dependency.  Make
>> > "--shared" imply "--local".
>> >
>> > Signed-off-by: Pavel Roskin <proski@gnu.org>
>> 
>> Hmph, then probably the manual should say it implies it...
>
> Actually, from the user point of view --local and --shared are
> alternatives to each other and to the default behavior.  --local copies
> files, --shared makes a reference.
>
> Saying that --shared implies --local could sound like git-clone would
> still copy all objects.
>
> My description was from the implementation point of view.

Ah.  Makes sense.