Re: getting source with git

[Johannes Schindelin]

Hi,

On Sat, 8 Aug 2009, Patrick McCarty wrote:

> On Sat, Aug 08, 2009 at 01:59:50AM -0700, Graham Percival wrote:
> > 
> > A few people talked about browsing the history, which surprised me.  
> > Whenever I want to look at history, I use the web git interface.  But 
> > evidently other people don't share my pathological hatred of git, so I 
> > guess that "availability of history" is a non-insignificant factor.
> 
> I actually like git.  :-)
> 
> But then again, it's the only VCS I've really ever used, so I can't make 
> too many comparisons.

I used CVS, Subversion, Visual Source Safe and PVCS.

Of those 5 systems, Git is the only one that does not get into the way (at 
least not completely so), and it actually gives me a couple of things 
other SCMs did not: easy bisection, branching and merging that does not 
suck, super-efficient transport and storage, hackability.  Oh, and I 
learnt how to code in C properly.  I knew the language and coded before, 
but I really only learnt proper C with Git.

> > Taking the above into consideration, I suggest that we don't change 
> > anything: CG 1 will only discuss method #3 (git remote add).  67 megs 
> > is still much larger than I'd _like_ to ask potential typo fixers to 
> > download, but this seems unavoidable.  :(
> 
> I think that's a good idea.  Even though a shallow clone is a much 
> smaller download, I would prefer having the full git history on my local 
> machine.  IMO, method #3 is a good compromise, since it retrieves the 
> full history just for that particular branch.

Note that turning a shallow into a non-shallow clone _should_ just be a 
question of

        $ git fetch --depth=0 origin

If not, please let me know, and I'll try to find some time to fix it.

Ciao,
Dscho