David,
One possible solution can be to use the external database daemon I am
working of for ref transactions.
Since this makes all refs be stored in a dedicated database instead of
the filesystem you no longer are dependent on file system semantics.
While not in the official git trees yet I
On Wed, 2014-08-13 at 09:20 -0700, Ronnie Sahlberg wrote:
David,
One possible solution can be to use the external database daemon I am
working of for ref transactions.
Since this makes all refs be stored in a dedicated database instead of
the filesystem you no longer are dependent on file
On 06/13/2014 11:25 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
Ronnie Sahlberg sahlb...@google.com writes:
It gets even more hairy :
If the server has A/a and a/b and you clone it it becomes A/a and A/b
locally. Then you push back to the server and you end up with three
refs on the server: A/a A/b and a/b.
On Wed, Jun 18, 2014 at 4:33 AM, Michael Haggerty mhag...@alum.mit.edu wrote:
On 06/13/2014 11:25 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
Ronnie Sahlberg sahlb...@google.com writes:
It gets even more hairy :
If the server has A/a and a/b and you clone it it becomes A/a and A/b
locally. Then you push back
On Fri, 2014-06-13 at 12:05 -0700, Ronnie Sahlberg wrote:
Thinking about it more.
I think we want to wait until the ref transaction API work is
finished. The ref transactions API is in progress and it aims to add
transactions for ref updates as a first step but then it aims to
define a
David Turner dtur...@twopensource.com writes:
On Thu, 2014-06-12 at 12:47 -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
David Turner dtur...@twopensource.com writes:
This issue bit us again recently.
In talking with some colleagues, I realized that the previous version
of this patch, in addition to
Torsten Bögershausen tbo...@web.de writes:
Or try to have a functionality to always use packed refs, and have a
configuration
for it:
The advantage can be that branch names like Branch and BRANCH can live
together
in a project, regardless if you have a case sensitive or insensitve file
On Thu, Jun 12, 2014 at 12:47 PM, Junio C Hamano gits...@pobox.com wrote:
David Turner dtur...@twopensource.com writes:
This issue bit us again recently.
In talking with some colleagues, I realized that the previous version
of this patch, in addition to being potentially slow, was
Thinking about it more.
I think we want to wait until the ref transaction API work is
finished. The ref transactions API is in progress and it aims to add
transactions for ref updates as a first step but then it aims to
define a public API for all public ref functions. As part of that I
will also
Ronnie Sahlberg sahlb...@google.com writes:
... The first
backend will be the current files based structure but I also will add
an optional backend using a TDB database.
I am assuming that as part of the transactions work, accesses to
reflogs will also have their own backends?
You could
Ronnie Sahlberg sahlb...@google.com writes:
It gets even more hairy :
If the server has A/a and a/b and you clone it it becomes A/a and A/b
locally. Then you push back to the server and you end up with three
refs on the server: A/a A/b and a/b.
That is part of the transition in deployment.
On Fri, Jun 13, 2014 at 2:11 PM, Junio C Hamano gits...@pobox.com wrote:
Ronnie Sahlberg sahlb...@google.com writes:
... The first
backend will be the current files based structure but I also will add
an optional backend using a TDB database.
I am assuming that as part of the transactions
David Turner dtur...@twopensource.com writes:
This issue bit us again recently.
In talking with some colleagues, I realized that the previous version
of this patch, in addition to being potentially slow, was incomplete.
Specifically, it didn't handle the case of refs/heads/case/one vs
On Thu, 2014-06-12 at 12:47 -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
David Turner dtur...@twopensource.com writes:
This issue bit us again recently.
In talking with some colleagues, I realized that the previous version
of this patch, in addition to being potentially slow, was incomplete.
On 2014-06-13 01.30, David Turner wrote:
On Thu, 2014-06-12 at 12:47 -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
David Turner dtur...@twopensource.com writes:
This issue bit us again recently.
In talking with some colleagues, I realized that the previous version
of this patch, in addition to being
This issue bit us again recently.
In talking with some colleagues, I realized that the previous version
of this patch, in addition to being potentially slow, was incomplete.
Specifically, it didn't handle the case of refs/heads/case/one vs
refs/heads/CASE/two; these are case clones even though
16 matches
Mail list logo
