Re: RFC: Allow missing objects during packing

[Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx>]

"Shawn O. Pearce" <spearce@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes:

> ... It seems pretty harmless to allow an object we
> aren't going to transmit but that we want to use as a delta base
> in a thin pack to be missing.  At worst we just get a little bit
> more data transfer.

If the check is only about a thin delta base that is not going to be
transmit, I'd agree.  But I do not see how you are distinguishing that
case and the case where an object you are actually sending is missing (in
which case we would want to error out, wouldn't we?)


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html