Hi Leo,
Leo Famulari writes:
> On Sun, Nov 29, 2020 at 10:24:18PM -0500, Maxim Cournoyer wrote:
>> I had researched this before and the option the git server is missing is
>> uploadpack.allowAnySHA1InWant [0]. Unfortunately last I check in
>> #savannah their machine (vcs0) is using an older Tri
On Sun, Nov 29, 2020 at 10:24:18PM -0500, Maxim Cournoyer wrote:
> I had researched this before and the option the git server is missing is
> uploadpack.allowAnySHA1InWant [0]. Unfortunately last I check in
> #savannah their machine (vcs0) is using an older Trisquel stuck with git
> v2.11.0, one p
Hello,
Leo Famulari writes:
> On Tue, Nov 03, 2020 at 10:48:25PM +0100, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
>> Weird, what’s the difference between fetch and clone technically? I
>> believe commit 329dabe13bf98b899b907b45565434c5140804f5 moved to “fetch”
>> precisely so we could do shallow clones.
>
> I don
On Tue, Nov 03, 2020 at 10:48:25PM +0100, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> Weird, what’s the difference between fetch and clone technically? I
> believe commit 329dabe13bf98b899b907b45565434c5140804f5 moved to “fetch”
> precisely so we could do shallow clones.
I don't know. It's definitely weird.
Hi,
Leo Famulari skribis:
> I poked around a bit and found that Savannah can serve shallow clones of
> random commits, but does not allow shallow *fetching*, except for
> special things such as Git tags. We fetch instead of clone.
Weird, what’s the difference between fetch and clone technically
I poked around a bit and found that Savannah can serve shallow clones of
random commits, but does not allow shallow *fetching*, except for
special things such as Git tags. We fetch instead of clone.
While building the package of Guix itself [0], I noticed that Savannah
can't serve cheap "shallow clones" of the commits that these packages
are based on, so users will end up doing full clones (260M on
disk):
--
building
/gnu/store/ma04vkl42jyr9p2nw5yzlzw61r5s2h3p-guix-1.1.0-31.1c6d985-check
