On Tue, 26 Jul 2005, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> >
> > Put another way: do you argue that X network transparency is a total waste
> > of time? You could certainly optimize X if you always made it be
> > local-machine only. Or you could make tons of special cases, and have X
> > have separate code-path
Linus Torvalds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> See? Trying to have one really solid code-path is not a waste of time.
An alternative code path specialized for local case would not be
too bad.
First, finding the list of objects to copy. You can use
alternate object pool to cover the upstream repo
Linus Torvalds wrote:
First, make sure you have a recent git, it does better at optimizing the
I was using vanilla git, as of 10 minutes before I sent the email. Top
of tree is 154d3d2dd2656c23ea04e9d1c6dd4e576a7af6de.
Secondly, what's the problem? Sure, I could special-case the local case
On Tue, 26 Jul, Jeff Garzik wrote:
>
> AFAICT this is
> just a complete waste of time. Why does this occur?
>
> Packing 1394 objects
> Unpacking 1394 objects
> 100% (1394/1394) done
>
> It doesn't seem to make any sense to perform work, then immediately undo
> th
Whenever I pull a local repository, such as
cd /spare/repo/libata-dev
git pull /spare/repo/linux-2.6/.git
git will pack, then unpack, the objects being pulled. AFAICT this is
just a complete waste of time. Why does this occur?
Packing 1394 objects
Unpacking 1394 objects
10
5 matches
Mail list logo
