On 6 April 2013 15:25, Tai-Lin Chu <tailinchu@gmail.com> wrote:
yes, i agree with you. But as a person who commits patches and needs to test, I think using --depth 1 makes initial cloning faster and decreases the load of remote git server. Think about this 100 people clones vlc.git with shadow (around 600mb) vs without shadow (around 10000mb)... its not just about whether you care it or not; please preserve resources of other projects.
I personally like small checkouts. If I am testing software, I don't really need much of its history, and I don't need to be able to commit anything. If I'm developing software, I'll have a separate directory with full checkouts anyway. VCS differences apply, though. There is really no pragmatic difference between copying with cp and exporting (Subversion) or cloning (Git) a VCS repo, except when you don't know what you're doing. If you make changes, a cp may not copy what you intend to copy, or vice-versa with export/clone. IMO, keeping checkouts lean and mean for building experimental packages is a good idea. VCS repos take a lot of space, and in the event you want to maintain package repos with them, you'd like the extra space saved. However, we need equivalent methods for every VCS we care to support ('depth' doesn't mean the same thing in svn, for instance), and we need to provide a mechanism to choose to keep depths (so that you may choose to reuse repos for your own use with full history and what not). -- GPG/PGP ID: C0711BF1