On Sun, Sep 08, 2013 at 01:28:47PM +0700, Nguyen Thai Ngoc Duy wrote:
> > From a cursory read, this seems fine. If it were done in complete
> > isolation, I'd say it was a slight regression, just because we are doing
> > more I/O for the unpack case, and it is not really saving us any code
> > (it
On Sun, Sep 8, 2013 at 11:44 AM, Jeff King wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 06, 2013 at 07:46:01AM +0700, Nguyen Thai Ngoc Duy wrote:
>
>> ---
>> I had something that could unpack without writing to temp pack file
>> but I scraped it and chose this way because it follows closely how
>> index-pack works. It
On Fri, Sep 06, 2013 at 07:46:01AM +0700, Nguyen Thai Ngoc Duy wrote:
> ---
> I had something that could unpack without writing to temp pack file
> but I scraped it and chose this way because it follows closely how
> index-pack works. It's a good thing imo because .pack v4 is coming
> and I do
If the number of objects in the given pack is less than the limit, all
objects in the pack will be unpacked, and the pack will not be created
if it's streamed in. It's intended to replace unpack-objects.
Unlike unpack-objects, this operation requires writing the stream to
disk for delta resolution
4 matches
Mail list logo
