| 1 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- |
| 2 |
Hash: SHA256 |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
On 19/09/14 10:48 AM, Rich Freeman wrote: |
| 5 |
> On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 10:25 AM, hasufell <hasufell@g.o> |
| 6 |
> wrote: |
| 7 |
>> |
| 8 |
>> That is pretty easy and takes you ~20s for a keyword merge. |
| 9 |
>> What's the problem? |
| 10 |
>> |
| 11 |
> |
| 12 |
> Agree. Also, there was a comment that git pull is much slower than |
| 13 |
> cvs. While it is true that git does refresh the whole tree all the |
| 14 |
> time, it is FAR more efficient at doing this than CVS, since the |
| 15 |
> local and remote repositories can use a single hash to determine |
| 16 |
> where each stands relative to the other, and the COW mechanism |
| 17 |
> applies to directory trees so when making comparisons git does not |
| 18 |
> need to traverse the full depth of the tree for every branch. A |
| 19 |
> cvs update on the entire tree is basically an independent |
| 20 |
> synchronization of every file in the tree. Also, by refreshing the |
| 21 |
> entire tree you also catch any repoman errors that might result |
| 22 |
> from commits to other packages that you didn't have visibility to |
| 23 |
> when refreshing only a single package in cvs. |
| 24 |
> |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
That wasn't really part of his argument, though -- when he's fixing |
| 27 |
keyword collisions, he's only working within one package, and CVS in |
| 28 |
that case -only- checks the subtree as of that package (ie, ./ and |
| 29 |
./files/) when updating. Git on the other hand will update the entire |
| 30 |
tree and there's no way around that, right? (unless of course i |
| 31 |
missed something in hasufell's command list) |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
I don't think there's any valid debate on whether git is more |
| 34 |
efficient than cvs on fetching tree-wide updates :) |
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
|
| 37 |
> I wonder if it would make sense to set up a practice git tree |
| 38 |
> somewhere so that people can try working together on workflows/etc. |
| 39 |
> We can clone a migrated tree (I have one from a few days ago on |
| 40 |
> github). |
| 41 |
|
| 42 |
Definitely. I'd volunteer for that (doing my updates to both git and |
| 43 |
cvs trees), and I expect others would as well. |
| 44 |
|
| 45 |
|
| 46 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- |
| 47 |
Version: GnuPG v2 |
| 48 |
|
| 49 |
iF4EAREIAAYFAlQcR1UACgkQ2ugaI38ACPA1ogEAmn9ZBr9nORFH02cxu4HML+9C |
| 50 |
OKyPystsxAaOdEnkzS8A/29mitUtED8jowJ+5Udh9YyYRjJApzx36hRMyyAsJUVc |
| 51 |
=B0E9 |
| 52 |
-----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |
Archives