| 1 |
On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 4:18 PM, Michał Górny <mgorny@g.o> wrote: |
| 2 |
> |
| 3 |
> Can't we just kill rsync then? The whole ChangeLog seems to take more |
| 4 |
> effort than the actual benefit it gives. |
| 5 |
> |
| 6 |
|
| 7 |
I'm not sure ditching rsync entirely is necessary - it might be more |
| 8 |
trouble than it is worth as it is a very effective simple way to |
| 9 |
distribute the tree. However, I'm not really opposed to it either. |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
However, I do really question whether we need changelogs in rsync. It |
| 12 |
seems like many projects are going away from these - or doing what the |
| 13 |
kernel is doing and just dumping a git log into them. I don't think |
| 14 |
we need to try to shoehorn the old changelogs into our git history - |
| 15 |
I'd just leave them in the tree for migration and then prune then |
| 16 |
post-migration. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
Oh, in case it is useful to know, a full historical git bundle is |
| 19 |
about 1.2GB, and a clone+checkout of the bundle uses about 2.1GB of |
| 20 |
space. A compressed cvs tarball with the full history is about 575MB |
| 21 |
in comparison, though I see it has grown by about 50MB in the last six |
| 22 |
months. Bottom line is that non-shallow checkouts will need a decent |
| 23 |
amount of space. Then again, my tmpfs /usr/portage uses 735M just by |
| 24 |
itself. |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
-- |
| 27 |
Rich |
Archives