On Thursday 30 April 2015 11:26:34 Paul Eggleton wrote:
> > I just find the term "full clone" a bit misleading here. I somehow tend
> > to associate it with a mirrored clone / cloning all refs / cloning with
> > full history. Could the term used above be "independent clone" or
> > "standalone clone
Hi Markus,
On Thursday 30 April 2015 13:17:41 Markus Lehtonen wrote:
> On Wed, 2015-04-29 at 14:41 +0100, Paul Eggleton wrote:
> > If -x is specified and the specified URI was a git repository, we need
> > to ensure that the resulting clone is a full clone and not one that has
> > pointers into th
Hi,
On Wed, 2015-04-29 at 14:41 +0100, Paul Eggleton wrote:
> If -x is specified and the specified URI was a git repository, we need
> to ensure that the resulting clone is a full clone and not one that has
> pointers into the temporary fetch location or DL_DIR. Split out the code
> from devtool t
If -x is specified and the specified URI was a git repository, we need
to ensure that the resulting clone is a full clone and not one that has
pointers into the temporary fetch location or DL_DIR. Split out the code
from devtool that already does this for "devtool modify -x" and reuse
that.
Signed
