From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox•com>
To: Michael Haggerty <mhagger@alum•mit.edu>
Cc: Jeff King <peff@peff•net>, Matt Whiteley <mattwhiteley@gmail•com>,
git@vger•kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] clone: add disassociate alias to dissociate option
Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2015 12:06:31 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <xmqqbnkjqdko.fsf@gitster.dls.corp.google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <54EC3EF8.7040302@alum.mit.edu> (Michael Haggerty's message of "Tue, 24 Feb 2015 10:06:00 +0100")
Michael Haggerty <mhagger@alum•mit.edu> writes:
> On 02/22/2015 07:32 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>> ... Both borrow the objects
>> in order to reduce the network cost, and the difference is that one
>> keeps borrowing while the other one limits the borrowing to strictly
>> the initial phase. The two words, "borrow" and "reference", would
>> not convey that key distinction. ... and that is why I
>> call it a cop-out.
>> ...
>> We are all on the same page. We know the cop-out is suboptimal, we
>> understand why the cop-out is better than "--borrow", and we cannot
>> come up with a better name that contrasts with the existing
>> "--reference" to make it clear how the new thing is different.
>
> I'll take that as an invitation to brainstorm :-)
>
> --use-objects-from=
> --copy-objects-from=
> --precopy-objects-from=
> --precopy-from=
> --donor=
> --object-donor=
> --steal-from=
> --steal-objects-from=
>
> Of these, I think I like "--object-donor" the best.
Donor (somehow the word reminds me of organ harvesting, yuck)?
I didn't think of the word 'copy', but that probably captures the
essence the best. "reference-to-borrow-and-then-dissociate" is an
implementation detail, which, as you say, we do not want the users
to view this operation as; copying locally instead of over the
network is what the user wants to do.
> By the way, once we have stopped thinking about this feature as
> "--reference" and then "--dissociate", it becomes obvious that a nice
> generalization would be to allow *any* repository (including remote
> ones) to serve as the object donor.
As I do not think of a workable approach to implement such a
mechanism, I'd refrain from being irresponsible and say "Yeah,
that's a neat idea", which would make me sound like clueless "me
too, why doesn't Git do that?" crowd.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-02-24 20:06 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-02-20 19:10 [PATCH] --disassociate alias for --dissociate clone option Matt Whiteley
2015-02-20 19:10 ` [PATCH 1/2] clone: add disassociate alias to dissociate option Matt Whiteley
2015-02-21 6:27 ` Jeff King
2015-02-21 7:13 ` Junio C Hamano
2015-02-21 7:35 ` Jeff King
2015-02-22 18:32 ` Junio C Hamano
2015-02-24 9:06 ` Michael Haggerty
2015-02-24 20:06 ` Junio C Hamano [this message]
2015-02-24 22:00 ` Michael Haggerty
2015-02-20 19:10 ` [PATCH 2/2] clone: Realign lines near disassociate option Matt Whiteley
2015-02-20 22:01 ` [PATCH] --disassociate alias for --dissociate clone option Eric Sunshine
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=xmqqbnkjqdko.fsf@gitster.dls.corp.google.com \
--to=gitster@pobox$(echo .)com \
--cc=git@vger$(echo .)kernel.org \
--cc=mattwhiteley@gmail$(echo .)com \
--cc=mhagger@alum$(echo .)mit.edu \
--cc=peff@peff$(echo .)net \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox