From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Matthijs Kooijman Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] During a shallow fetch, prevent sending over unneeded objects Date: Wed, 28 Aug 2013 17:36:38 +0200 Message-ID: <20130828153638.GF10217@login.drsnuggles.stderr.nl> References: <20130711220127.GK10217@login.drsnuggles.stderr.nl> <7vfvukbrqh.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> <20130812080203.GK10217@login.drsnuggles.stderr.nl> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Junio C Hamano , Git Mailing List To: Duy Nguyen X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Wed Aug 28 17:36:52 2013 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1VEhnc-00089b-2R for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Wed, 28 Aug 2013 17:36:48 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753618Ab3H1Pgo (ORCPT ); Wed, 28 Aug 2013 11:36:44 -0400 Received: from drsnuggles.stderr.nl ([94.142.244.14]:37592 "EHLO drsnuggles.stderr.nl" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752817Ab3H1Pgn (ORCPT ); Wed, 28 Aug 2013 11:36:43 -0400 Received: from login.drsnuggles.stderr.nl ([10.42.0.9] ident=mail) by mail.drsnuggles.stderr.nl with smtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1VEhnS-0004QQ-RB; Wed, 28 Aug 2013 17:36:39 +0200 Received: (nullmailer pid 17011 invoked by uid 1000); Wed, 28 Aug 2013 15:36:38 -0000 Mail-Followup-To: Matthijs Kooijman , Duy Nguyen , Junio C Hamano , Git Mailing List Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-PGP-Fingerprint: 7F6A 9F44 2820 18E2 18DE 24AA CF49 D0E6 8A2F AFBC X-PGP-Key: http://www.stderr.nl/static/files/gpg_pubkey.asc User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) X-Spam-Score: -2.6 (--) X-Spam-Report: Spamchecked on "mail.drsnuggles.stderr.nl" pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- ------------------------------------------- -2.6 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 0 to 1% [score: 0.0000] Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Hi Duy, > I thought a bit but my thoughts often get stuck if I don't write them > down in form of code :-) so this is what I got so far. 4/6 is a good > thing in my opinion, but I might overlook something 6/6 is about this > thread. The series looks good to me, though I don't know enough about the code to do detailed analysis. In any case, I agree that 4/6 is a good change, it removes a bunch of similar code for the shallow special case (which is now no longer a completely separate special case). The total series also seems to actually fix the problem I reported. I'll resend the testcase from my original patch as well, which now passes with your series applied. Thanks for diving into this! Gr. Matthijs