On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 1:54 PM, Junio C Hamano <gits...@pobox.com> wrote:
>> Sounds buggy.  Would anything break if we were to make --depth=1 mean
>> "1 deep, including the tip commit"?
> As long as we do not change the meaning of the "shallow" count going
> over the wire (i.e. the number we receive from the user will be
> fudged, so that user's "depth 1" that used to mean "the tip and one
> behind it" is expressed as "depth 2" at the end-user level, and we
> send over the wire the number that corresponded to the old "depth
> 1"), I do not think anything will break, and then --depth=0 may
> magically start meaning "only the tip; its immediate parents will
> not be transferred and recorded as the shallow boundary in the
> receiving repository".

I'd rather we reserve 0 for unlimited fetch, something we haven't done
so far [1]. And because "unlimited clone" with --depth does not make
sense, --depth=0 should be rejected by git-clone.

[1] If we don't want to break the protocol, we could make depth
0xffffffff a special value as "unlimited" for newer git. Older git
works most of the time, until some project exceeds 4G commit depth
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Reply via email to