Hi,
On Thu, 24 Jul 2008, Jeff King wrote:
As a user, I would expect "sparse clone" to also be sparse on the
fetching. That is, to not even bother fetching tree objects that we are
not going to check out. But that is a whole other can of worms from
local sparseness, so I think it is worth saving for a different series.
I think this is not even worth of a series. Sure, it would have benefits
for those who want sparse checkouts. But it comes for a high price on
everyone else:
- security issues (you'd need to open the git protocol to give you
something else than a ref, _including_ refs that were deleted)
- performance issues (the server would have to do a lot more, faking
commits, or in the alternative serving a gazillion more sessions if the
client does the reconstruction)
... and I am sure there are tons more issues.
Ciao,
Dscho