From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jon Seymour Subject: Re: [PATCH] improved delta support for git Date: Fri, 13 May 2005 00:47:34 +1000 Message-ID: <2cfc403205051207471f6957e0@mail.gmail.com> References: <7voebhkql5.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> <200505121027.01964.mason@suse.com> <2cfc403205051207467755cdf@mail.gmail.com> Reply-To: jon@blackcubes.dyndns.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Thu May 12 16:41:29 2005 Return-path: Received: from vger.kernel.org ([12.107.209.244]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1DWEqz-0006CE-RY for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Thu, 12 May 2005 16:39:58 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261978AbVELOrh (ORCPT ); Thu, 12 May 2005 10:47:37 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261981AbVELOrh (ORCPT ); Thu, 12 May 2005 10:47:37 -0400 Received: from rproxy.gmail.com ([64.233.170.197]:26968 "EHLO rproxy.gmail.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261978AbVELOre convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Thu, 12 May 2005 10:47:34 -0400 Received: by rproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id i8so66092rne for ; Thu, 12 May 2005 07:47:34 -0700 (PDT) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:reply-to:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=FuJBKHRBPOsOzDz/YlIGGvH3y1YgjIc95nNw0m7E8556F5hQOCsJPJuvK0gK7BpqRePGGXRD6oQzfxsWte5VLeR+Ntq0zHOzzGUvsMnLSXitQIhbopy/iuU9GJJ3ac9ZWsXlKUloOd2DeWD6j9mZi2pgnu39+WjVre9dXpcj+3w= Received: by 10.38.208.18 with SMTP id f18mr238113rng; Thu, 12 May 2005 07:47:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.38.104.37 with HTTP; Thu, 12 May 2005 07:47:34 -0700 (PDT) To: Git Mailing List In-Reply-To: <2cfc403205051207467755cdf@mail.gmail.com> Content-Disposition: inline Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On 5/13/05, Chris Mason wrote: > On Thursday 12 May 2005 00:36, Junio C Hamano wrote: > > It appears to me that changes to the make_sure_we_have_it() ... > > If we fetch the named object and it is a delta, the delta will either depend > on an object we already have or an object that we don't have. If we don't > have it, the pull should find it while pulling other commits we don't have. > Chris, Doesn't that assume that the object referenced by the delta is reachable from the commit being pulled. While that may be true in practice, I don't think it is a logical certainty. jon.