2 ms·

blobless still better than shallow because at least commit history is preserved.

• jakub_g 2y ago
  It might be fine for small repos, but for massive repos, blobless/treeless clones become unmanageable because many git operations become very slow. I added some further links. From my side, when you have non-trivial sized repo, on local machine one should either use either a shallow, or a full clone (or, if possible, a sparse checkout, but this requires repo to be compatible).
  • nopurpose 2y ago
    you are comparing what is possible but can be slow with blobless with what is impossible with shallow, which is unfair.
    • cluckindan 2y ago
      Given that remote git repos are fundamentally incremental in nature, the limit of impracticality is infinite and eventually must equal impossibility. There is a Moore’s law analogue buried there somewhere in how fast repos grow in relation to network and computing resources (an increase in which of course also makes repos grow faster)