From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff King Subject: Re: [PATCH/RFC 0/3] --seed as an alias for --dissociate --reference Date: Thu, 21 May 2015 01:06:45 -0400 Message-ID: <20150521050645.GA27478@peff.net> References: <20150521041435.GA18978@peff.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, Michael Haggerty To: Junio C Hamano X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Thu May 21 07:06:54 2015 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 1YvIh2-0003qe-NI for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Thu, 21 May 2015 07:06:53 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751215AbbEUFGs (ORCPT ); Thu, 21 May 2015 01:06:48 -0400 Received: from cloud.peff.net ([50.56.180.127]:33754 "HELO cloud.peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1751186AbbEUFGr (ORCPT ); Thu, 21 May 2015 01:06:47 -0400 Received: (qmail 3698 invoked by uid 102); 21 May 2015 05:06:47 -0000 Received: from Unknown (HELO peff.net) (10.0.1.1) by cloud.peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.84) with SMTP; Thu, 21 May 2015 00:06:47 -0500 Received: (qmail 31802 invoked by uid 107); 21 May 2015 05:06:49 -0000 Received: from sigill.intra.peff.net (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (10.0.0.7) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.84) with SMTP; Thu, 21 May 2015 01:06:49 -0400 Received: by sigill.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Thu, 21 May 2015 01:06:45 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Wed, May 20, 2015 at 10:01:49PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > > 1. Assuming that "seed" is a reasonable verb for this concept, is > > "--seed=" OK for the option? Would "--seed-from=" be > > better? (Also, the response "bleh, seed is a terrible name" is > > fine, too, but only if accompanied by your own suggestion :) ). > > The seed may not even have to be a repository. A bundle file hosted > on CDN that is reachable via (resumable) wget would be another good > way to prime the well, and it would fit with the above framework > nicely. Grab it, fetch from it into a temporary hierarchy and then > run "fetch --prune" against the repository you originally wanted to > clone from. Yeah, I was just looking over the list archives for the past few months, for things I had marked as "to read and think about later"[1]. That's how I recalled our prior discussion on --dissociate. Anyway, I happened upon the "prime the clone from a bundle" concept being discussed again recently, and had the same thought. We already treat local bundles as a possible source for fetching/cloning. Once upon a time I had some patches that would let you clone straight from a bundle over http (it just spooled to disk, which is not the _most_ efficient way to do it, but trying to massage the bundle straight into a packfile[2] ends up every complex very quickly). I should resurrect those patches. -Peff [1] My "think about later" mailbox has ~5000 messages in it, some of which are from 2010. I think I may need to just declare bankruptcy. [2] There's that word again.