Re: Tracking a repository for content instead of history

Hi,

On Tue, 12 Dec 2006, Andy Parkins wrote:

On Tuesday 2006 December 12 14:28, Johannes Schindelin wrote:

quoted

You are not by any chance talking about the --remote option to
git-archive?

I wasn't; but that's certainly a helpful switch.  It's certainly a huge 
help.

quoted

If you want to reduce the number of objects to be downloaded, by telling
the other side what you have, you literally end up with something like
shallow clone: the other side _has_ to support it.

I suppose so; but I was thinking more an automated way of getting the data 
that is supplied for the kernel anyway.  So:

base-v1.0.0.tar.gz
patch-v1.0.1.gz
patch-v1.0.2.gz
etc

Each patch is obviously smaller than "base".  Git could easily make the 
patches, and each of those patches could be fed by hand into a repository 
with git-apply.

If it weren't for the recent discussion of kernel.org being overloaded 
with gitweb processes, I'd just write down a hint like 
http://repo.or.cz/w/git/jnareb-git.git?a=commitdiff_plain;h=next;hp=master

But since kernel.org is overloaded, I will not do that.

Ciao,