On Tue, Mar 8, 2016 at 8:30 PM, Jeff King <[email protected]> wrote: > On Tue, Mar 08, 2016 at 08:25:24AM -0500, Jeff King wrote: > >> > Good news. We have the mechanism in place, I think. >> > get_shallow_commits_by_rev_list() (from 'pu') will produce the right >> > shallow points for sending back to the client if you pass "--not >> > <current shallow points>" to it. It's meant to be used for >> > --shallow-exclude and --shallow-since, but if neither is given (nor >> > --depth) I guess we can run it with current shallow points. I wonder >> > if we can detect some common cases and avoid commit traversing this >> > way though. >> >> I tried that, but I couldn't quite get it to work. I don't think we need >> any special rev-list, though; we can just find the boundary points of >> that traversal and mark them as new shallows. > > By the way, I found a bug during my initial attempts with > get_shallow_commits_by_rev_list().
Hehe. Thanks. Will check why tests missed it and reroll with Ramsay's fix once -rc period is over. -- Duy -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
