On 27/2/03 1:11, "Stefano Mazzocchi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Pier Fumagalli wrote: >> On 26/2/03 21:22, "Stefano Mazzocchi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> >>> Running a CVS update takes a lot just for a few files. I believe this is >>> due to the fact that xml-cocoon2 has reached 230Mb!!! of stuff. >>> >>> Now, is anybody against having me going into the CVS tree and prune >>> stuff for real? [I promise to make a backup copy first :)] >>> >>> This will also solve the issue of seeing all those empty directories in >>> ViewCVS that make our CVS repository look a mess from the web. >>> >>> Also, I plan to dive into the attic of all lib folders and blast all the >>> previous versions of those files (we don't roll back libraries from CVS >>> anyway). >>> >>> That will hopefully reduce the weight of our tree and improve 'cvs >>> update' time (and reduce icarus load, which is not a bad thing at all) >>> >>> Comments? >> >> >> Yes... A few. Pruning a tree by hand is a _very_ bad idea, IMVHO, because >> it'll destroy all history of the project, and in our case, as we're using >> branches, not only of the 2.1 tree, but of the 2.0 as well. > > Damn, I should have read this email before trying the pruning myself.... > I went from 230 Mb to 60Mb but find out later that I wiped out all the > branches. :( > > Luckily enough, I made a backup :) > > So everything is back to normal now. Good boy! :-) And when you do restore from a backup, make sure that you do a chmod g+w so that I don't have to call you up at 2AM (cuz I know you're awake!) >> But having managed CVS installs for the past 4 years, now, I kinda see the >> point, the more you add stuff into history, the heavier the repository gets. > > Yes, CVS branches are evil. I'm starting to realize that. Welcome to the world of haters of CVS... SVN _IS_ going to fix that... >> Subversion _will_ solve this issue, that's for sure, so my suggestion would >> be to move over onto that system, but there are IMHO, still issues with the >> availability of non-command line clients. I would wait to start using it >> until <http://tortoisesvn.tigris.org/> doesn't start working properly and it >> gets more widely deployed (I'm watching that space because we want to use it >> at VNU). > > Yes, we'll seriously think about moving to subversion when the tools come. As I said, my work requires me to track it down, so, you'll be the second one to know that all my tests are successful (first one is going to be my manager)... >> My recommended plan of action to sort out this issue would be to hop on the >> good foot of having our own PMC, and starting to move things around: >> >> - Rename the "xml-cocoon" repository to "cocoon-1" > > I would say 'cocoon-1.x' I moved the repository to be "cocoon-1"... The old one, though, is still symlinked to the new name as people might have to do CVS diffs before being able to switch over to the new repository >> - Rename the "xml-cocoon2" repository to "cocoon-2" > > I would say 'cocoon-2-historical' or something like that As above... But the name is "cocoon-2-historical"... >> - Create a new repository called "cocoon-2.0" and copy over the cocoon-2_0_5 >> branch of "xml-cocoon2" (clean checkout, and re-import) > > cocoon-2.0.x I called this "cocoon-2.0", and it contains the latest copy of the "cocoon_2_0_3" branch... >> - Create a new repository called "cocoon-2.1" and copy over head from the >> main "xml-cocoon2" repository (clean checkout, and re-import) > > cocoon-2.1.x Same as above, I called it cocoon-2.1... Should I rename all the "new" repositories? I did it before seeing your email, and I went ahead with my own naming scheme... >> - Decide what to do with "xml-cocoon2-apps" > > blast it. SUUUUUUURREEEEEEE??????????? Since the only one writing anything to that CVS repo was Nicola Ken, I'd better ask him first before blasting something... >> - Make sure that all cocoon committers are in the "cocoon" group and >> transfer ownership to that group of those newly created and renamed >> modules... >> >> This is IMO the best way to go... I can make that happen in few minutes (max >> 1/2 hour) when I'm granted access to the Cocoon group... I'll just need you >> people not to do any commit in the old repo for a bit... >> >> We don't loose history, and we get speed... What about it? > > +1, I learned it the hard way :/ You know? Whenever it comes to UNIX admin, you should really give your friends up in London a call... :-) Me and Fede already did everything you can possibly think of, and most of the times, had to revert back to DLT tapes to get history back! :-) Pier
