From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff King Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] clone: add `--seed` shorthand Date: Wed, 27 May 2015 04:19:10 -0400 Message-ID: <20150527081909.GA10008@peff.net> References: <20150521041435.GA18978@peff.net> <20150521041619.GC5196@peff.net> <8895881cd3f324d2b8a827e311296a48@www.dscho.org> <3516DC60279A42188EE2AA394921FC70@PhilipOakley> <1be7702fa53d1705e913aff2e00eac21@www.dscho.org> <20150522064922.GA27716@peff.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Cc: Johannes Schindelin , Philip Oakley , git@vger.kernel.org, Michael Haggerty To: Junio C Hamano X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Wed May 27 10:19:19 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 1YxWYZ-0000fm-9a for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Wed, 27 May 2015 10:19:19 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752552AbbE0ITO (ORCPT ); Wed, 27 May 2015 04:19:14 -0400 Received: from cloud.peff.net ([50.56.180.127]:36546 "HELO cloud.peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1752232AbbE0ITM (ORCPT ); Wed, 27 May 2015 04:19:12 -0400 Received: (qmail 4628 invoked by uid 102); 27 May 2015 08:19:12 -0000 Received: from Unknown (HELO peff.net) (10.0.1.1) by cloud.peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.84) with SMTP; Wed, 27 May 2015 03:19:12 -0500 Received: (qmail 5500 invoked by uid 107); 27 May 2015 08:19:16 -0000 Received: from sigill.intra.peff.net (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (10.0.0.7) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.84) with SMTP; Wed, 27 May 2015 04:19:16 -0400 Received: by sigill.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Wed, 27 May 2015 04:19:10 -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 Sun, May 24, 2015 at 12:07:53PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Jeff King writes: > > > Having slept on it, I really think "--seed" should be "fetch from the > > seed into temp refs", and not what I posted earlier. > > Yeah, I think that is the right way to do it. In the meantime, do you want to pick up patches 1 and 2? I think they are cleanups that stand on their own, whether we do patch 3 or not. -Peff