From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Danny Milosavljevic Subject: bug#30428: guix git-fetch doesn't specify "--depth 1" - git clone clones a lot without any use Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2018 14:38:05 +0100 Message-ID: <20180218143612.32fa5fc7@scratchpost.org> References: <20180212011641.3deb7fd6@scratchpost.org> <20180212150939.GA5852@jasmine.lan> <20180212235950.4638aad6@scratchpost.org> <87fu63sme8.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:41517) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1enPBJ-0002fW-5Z for bug-guix@gnu.org; Sun, 18 Feb 2018 08:39:06 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1enPBG-0002g6-3C for bug-guix@gnu.org; Sun, 18 Feb 2018 08:39:05 -0500 Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.43]:41129) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1enPBF-0002g0-Vw for bug-guix@gnu.org; Sun, 18 Feb 2018 08:39:02 -0500 Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1enPBF-0004li-Mn for bug-guix@gnu.org; Sun, 18 Feb 2018 08:39:01 -0500 Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <87fu63sme8.fsf@gnu.org> List-Id: Bug reports for GNU Guix List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-guix-bounces+gcggb-bug-guix=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: "bug-Guix" To: Ludovic =?UTF-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= Cc: 30428@debbugs.gnu.org Hi Ludo, On Wed, 14 Feb 2018 14:58:55 +0100 ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic Court=C3=A8s) wrote: > I think it=E2=80=99s a great idea. FWIW, Andy proposed something along t= hese > lines, but the idea was to use shallow clones for tags only because in > other cases it might not work (?): >=20 > https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel/2015-08/msg00258.html Yeah, some git servers either don't support searching by commit at all or only support it after enabling it manually in the config file (justification is some kind of privacy thing where accidentially a private file could have been pushed to a public repo and then reverted - with the commit hash you'd still get to it). =20 I'd rather not do the more involved patchset at the time being. I don't understand git all that well. It's already much nicer just to try the shallow commit checkout and fall ba= ck to the current way if it doesn't work - and it's low risk.