I wonder if even a shallow fetch with depth 1 would be sufficient? This could result in an even bigger performance boost. There is a follow up post with some performance measurements: https://github.blog/2020-12-22-git-clone-a-data-driven-study-on-cloning-behaviors/

In my understanding (which may be wrong), poetry always does a clone, followed by a checkout of a specific reference. checkout is never used several times with different references on an existing repo, is it?

Of course, using shallow fetch would be a more significant change compared to blobless clone. clone and checkout could not be considered separately anymore. The (simplified) sequence of git commands should probably look like this (in order to maximize the performance benefit):

git init
git remote add origin <repo-url>
git fetch --depth 1 origin <ref>
git checkout FETCH_HEAD

Probably, shallow fetch should not replace the existing clone and checkout methods of the Git class anyway but be an additional option which could be used by poetry but may not be used by other downstream projects. Thus, it could be considered in a separate PR.

It could work. And it could be better. However, that would be more drastic. For example, if poetry kept a real cache, it would be more useful with a blobless clone than with a shallow clone.

This one enhancement is good and means practically no difference in current behavior. Actually, if all tests go green, is enough prove that this won't change anything deeply important.

I think that can be considered as a separate future enhancement, but I don't see that as a blocker for this enhancement.

OTOH, neither of these fix the problem explained in python-poetry/poetry#5188 (quadruplicated clones). Again, not a blocker for this enhancement IMHO.

In the linked pip PR, the git version is checked. Maybe, we should also check the version.

What is the lowest version supported here for git?

Probably, this is not specified anywhere.

Version checked.

Kudos, SonarCloud Quality Gate passed!   

0 Bugs
0 Vulnerabilities
0 Security Hotspots
0 Code Smells

No Coverage information
0.0% Duplication

@yajo Can you please rebase your branch in order to allow merging? Probably, you have to adapt the type hints.

I think it should be good now.

Kudos, SonarCloud Quality Gate passed!   

0 Bugs
0 Vulnerabilities
0 Security Hotspots
0 Code Smells

No Coverage information
0.6% Duplication