Gentoo Archives: gentoo-scm

From: Jeremy Olexa <darkside@g.o>
To: gentoo-scm@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-scm] Grafting and small repos
Date: Mon, 09 Feb 2009 22:30:31
Message-Id: 4990AE85.4010700@gentoo.org
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-scm] Grafting and small repos by Mike Auty
1 Mike Auty wrote:
2 > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
3 > Hash: SHA1
4 >
5 > Lance Albertson wrote:
6 >> What if we took a slightly different angle with this. I'm not sure if
7 >> this is possible, so correct me if I'm wrong. Most developers don't need
8 >> history past a year, but having recent history is important. What if we
9 >> created an archive repo that contains all the history but the main one
10 >> only contains a years worth? If a developer did want the whole history,
11 >> they could just graft it onto the live repo.
12 >
13 > Yeah, as far as I'm aware the initial repo can be any length of time (a
14 > week old, a year old, etc), so that wouldn't pose a problem.
15 >
16 >> Anyways, I think devs should always have history, just not 5 years worth
17 >> of it.
18 >
19 > True, it's getting it in the first place that's a bit of a strain on the
20 > ifrastructure...
21
22 FWIW, that is my feelings too. I don't need/want history, that is older
23 than a year. I would also accept losing all history if it means that we
24 can easily move forward and drop CVS. (ChangeLogs are the past history,
25 git commit messages are the new history - or something) I brought this
26 up to Donnie and his feelings were that if we don't have all the
27 history, then we should not even use a VCS.
28
29 meh. I'm looking forward to this grafting idea.
30
31 -Jeremy