(It looks like I did not reply to this other email yet, sorry about
this late reply.)
On Wed, Jul 12, 2017 at 9:06 PM, Jonathan Tan wrote:
> On Tue, 20 Jun 2017 09:54:34 +0200
> Christian Couder wrote:
>
>> Git can store its objects only in the form of loose objects in
>> separate files or packe
(It looks like I did not reply to this email yet, sorry about this late reply.)
On Thu, Jul 6, 2017 at 7:36 PM, Ben Peart wrote:
>
> On 7/1/2017 3:41 PM, Christian Couder wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Jun 23, 2017 at 8:24 PM, Ben Peart wrote:
>>>
>>> Great to see this making progress!
>>>
>>> My thoughts
On Tue, 20 Jun 2017 09:54:34 +0200
Christian Couder wrote:
> Git can store its objects only in the form of loose objects in
> separate files or packed objects in a pack file.
>
> To be able to better handle some kind of objects, for example big
> blobs, it would be nice if Git could store its ob
On 7/1/2017 3:41 PM, Christian Couder wrote:
On Fri, Jun 23, 2017 at 8:24 PM, Ben Peart wrote:
On 6/20/2017 3:54 AM, Christian Couder wrote:
To be able to better handle some kind of objects, for example big
blobs, it would be nice if Git could store its objects in other object
databases
Christian Couder writes:
> On Sat, Jul 1, 2017 at 10:33 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>> Christian Couder writes:
>>
I think it would be good to ensure the
interface is robust and performant enough to actually replace the current
object store interface (even if we don't actually do t
On Sat, Jul 1, 2017 at 10:33 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Christian Couder writes:
>
>>> I think it would be good to ensure the
>>> interface is robust and performant enough to actually replace the current
>>> object store interface (even if we don't actually do that just yet).
>>
>> I agree that
Christian Couder writes:
>> I think it would be good to ensure the
>> interface is robust and performant enough to actually replace the current
>> object store interface (even if we don't actually do that just yet).
>
> I agree that it should be robust and performant, but I don't think it
> needs
On Sat, Jul 1, 2017 at 9:41 PM, Christian Couder
wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 23, 2017 at 8:24 PM, Ben Peart wrote:
>> The fact that "git clone is taught a --initial-refspec" option" indicates
>> this isn't just an ODB implementation detail. Is there a general capability
>> that is missing from the ODB
On Fri, Jun 23, 2017 at 8:24 PM, Ben Peart wrote:
>
>
> On 6/20/2017 3:54 AM, Christian Couder wrote:
>> To be able to better handle some kind of objects, for example big
>> blobs, it would be nice if Git could store its objects in other object
>> databases (ODB).
>>
>> To do that, this patch ser
On 6/20/2017 3:54 AM, Christian Couder wrote:
Goal
Git can store its objects only in the form of loose objects in
separate files or packed objects in a pack file.
To be able to better handle some kind of objects, for example big
blobs, it would be nice if Git could store its objects in o
On Tue, Jun 20, 2017 at 9:54 AM, Christian Couder
wrote:
>
> Future work
> ~~~
>
> First sorry about the state of this patch series, it is not as clean
> as I would have liked, butI think it is interesting to get feedback
> from the mailing list at this point, because the previous RFC was
Goal
Git can store its objects only in the form of loose objects in
separate files or packed objects in a pack file.
To be able to better handle some kind of objects, for example big
blobs, it would be nice if Git could store its objects in other object
databases (ODB).
To do that, this pat
12 matches
Mail list logo
