<p><br>
On May 6, 2011 10:21 AM, "Sune Foldager" <<a href="mailto:cryo@cyanite.org">cryo@cyanite.org</a>> wrote:<br>
><br>
> Benoit, I think we're gonna have to move even more intelligence into the bundler.<br>
> Currently, group performs the main revision loop, and calls the bundler to generate<br>
> each revision entry in the bundle.<br>
><br>
> I think we'll need to move the loop into the bundler as well. In that way, the<br>
> bundler can have maximum flexibility to select deltaparents and to ask the revlog<br>
> what deltaparents IT uses, so it might strive to use the same, so the deltas can be<br>
> transfered directly. It can also test that it actually includes, in the bundle, the<br>
> revisions it would base against, which is important.</p>
<p>For shallow clones too, should we ever implement them in bundles. <br>
-parren <br></p>
<p>><br>
> It would presumably no longer need to call revdiff, or at least not until it has<br>
> already called deltaparent and perfomed some decisions.<br>
><br>
> I am of course thinking of the scenario bundle2 + generaldelta/lwcopy here.<br>
> What do you think?<br>
><br>
> Sune<br>
> _______________________________________________<br>
> Mercurial-devel mailing list<br>
> <a href="mailto:Mercurial-devel@selenic.com">Mercurial-devel@selenic.com</a><br>
> <a href="http://selenic.com/mailman/listinfo/mercurial-devel">http://selenic.com/mailman/listinfo/mercurial-devel</a><br>
</p>