4 ms·
For all the technical excellence in git's plumbing, I'm surprised that nobody has bothered to implement resumable cloning yet. Apart from the issues with bitbuc
by microtherion 5y ago
For all the technical excellence in git's plumbing, I'm surprised that nobody has bothered to implement resumable cloning yet. Apart from the issues with bitbucket as a specific platform, every now and then I have to clone repos of a size that a simple bandwidth calculation tells me is going to be a multi-day endeavour, and even in the best families, a connection is not guaranteed to stay up that long.
So to this day, I keep having to clone locally and then rsync --partial the .git folder over the slow link. Surely it should not be an insurmountable problem to not throw away a partial clone, but instead offer to resume at a reasonable checkpoint?
- withinboredom 5y agoMulti-day… snail mail probably has higher bandwidth, depending on the distance. I usually use https instead of ssh for bigger clones as it tends to be more resilient in the face of tcp shenanigans.