List Archive: gentoo-dev
Note: Due to technical difficulties, the Archives are currently not up to date.
provides an alternative service for most mailing lists.c.f. bug 424647
Robin H. Johnson писал 2012-05-23 19:47:
> On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 02:42:37PM +0200, Michael Weber wrote:
>> i've looked at the blockers of "[TRACKER] portage migration to git"
>>  and want to discuss "testing git-cvsserver" .
>> There are two proposed scenarios how to migrate the developers write
>> access to the portage tree.
> The primary reasons to continue to support CVS-style access via
> 1. Lightweight partial/subtree checkouts
> - Git has implemented subtree checkouts, but they still bring down
> fairly large packfile.
> 2. Arches were Git repos are too heavy (Kumba wanted this for MIPS)
Isnt git works with shallow clone? like
# git clone --depth 1 <or any other desired value>
So you can clone in this manner and push changes back
Also for depth = 1 pack size will be similar to gzipped rsync snapshot
> If we can get rid of #2, we're willing to live with #1.
>> "Clean cut" turns of cvs access on a given and announced timestamp,
>> rsync-generation/updates is suspended (no input -> no changes), some
>> magic scripts prepare the git repo (according to , some hours
>> duration) and we all checkout the tree (might be some funny massive
> 1. You will be given git bundles instead of being allowed to do
> clone. That way it's just a resumable HTTP download.
> 2. rsync generation is NOT going away. Users will still be using it.
Alexey 'Alexxy' Shvetsov
Petersburg Nuclear Physics Institute, NRC Kurchatov Institute,
Department of Molecular and Radiation Biophysics
Gentoo Team Ru
Gentoo Linux Dev