Re: RFC: Allow missing objects during packing

"Shawn O. Pearce" [off-list ref] writes:

... It seems pretty harmless to allow an object we
aren't going to transmit but that we want to use as a delta base
in a thin pack to be missing.  At worst we just get a little bit
more data transfer.

If the check is only about a thin delta base that is not going to be
transmit, I'd agree.  But I do not see how you are distinguishing that
case and the case where an object you are actually sending is missing (in
which case we would want to error out, wouldn't we?)