[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: getting source with git
From: |
Johannes Schindelin |
Subject: |
Re: getting source with git |
Date: |
Sun, 9 Aug 2009 19:28:35 +0200 (CEST) |
User-agent: |
Alpine 1.00 (DEB 882 2007-12-20) |
Hi,
On Sat, 8 Aug 2009, Patrick McCarty wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 08, 2009 at 01:59:50AM -0700, Graham Percival wrote:
> >
> > A few people talked about browsing the history, which surprised me.
> > Whenever I want to look at history, I use the web git interface. But
> > evidently other people don't share my pathological hatred of git, so I
> > guess that "availability of history" is a non-insignificant factor.
>
> I actually like git. :-)
>
> But then again, it's the only VCS I've really ever used, so I can't make
> too many comparisons.
I used CVS, Subversion, Visual Source Safe and PVCS.
Of those 5 systems, Git is the only one that does not get into the way (at
least not completely so), and it actually gives me a couple of things
other SCMs did not: easy bisection, branching and merging that does not
suck, super-efficient transport and storage, hackability. Oh, and I
learnt how to code in C properly. I knew the language and coded before,
but I really only learnt proper C with Git.
> > Taking the above into consideration, I suggest that we don't change
> > anything: CG 1 will only discuss method #3 (git remote add). 67 megs
> > is still much larger than I'd _like_ to ask potential typo fixers to
> > download, but this seems unavoidable. :(
>
> I think that's a good idea. Even though a shallow clone is a much
> smaller download, I would prefer having the full git history on my local
> machine. IMO, method #3 is a good compromise, since it retrieves the
> full history just for that particular branch.
Note that turning a shallow into a non-shallow clone _should_ just be a
question of
$ git fetch --depth=0 origin
If not, please let me know, and I'll try to find some time to fix it.
Ciao,
Dscho