Gentoo Archives: gentoo-scm

From: Nirbheek Chauhan <nirbheek.chauhan@×××××.com>
To: gentoo-scm@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-scm] Re: [gentoo-dev] Progress on cvs->git migration
Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2011 08:11:45
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-scm] Re: [gentoo-dev] Progress on cvs->git migration by Fabian Groffen
On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 12:28 PM, Fabian Groffen <grobian@g.o> wrote:
> On 24-08-2011 00:44:57 -0400, Matt Turner wrote: >> On Tue, Aug 23, 2011 at 10:30 PM, Donnie Berkholz <dberkholz@g.o> wrote: >> > On 15:49 Tue 23 Aug     , Lance Albertson wrote: >> >> I think using the shortlog output is the sane solution otherwise you're >> >> just replicating what you do in the commit. >> > >> > It's not replication if users continue to use rsync; they won't have >> > commit info. >> >> Do we really want users to continue using rsync? Isn't git pull so >> much faster? What's the downside of users using git directly? > > ehm, that you need git?  that you need to use git to get information > about changes?  that you need a whole new infrastructure of mirrors to > get it running (vs the rsync infrastructure)?  that you need at minimum > 800MiB to be able to look at some history, iso. 286MiB as the rsync tree > is now? > > Besides from that git doesn't even work on all platforms, but I can > imagine you don't care about that. >
Actually, the major blocker as I understand it, is portage metadata cache regeneration. -- ~Nirbheek Chauhan Gentoo GNOME+Mozilla Team