On Wed, May 16, 2018 at 04:02:53PM -0400, Konstantin Ryabitsev wrote: > On 05/16/18 15:37, Jeff King wrote: > > Yes, that's pretty close to what we do at GitHub. Before doing any > > repacking in the mother repo, we actually do the equivalent of: > > > > git fetch --prune ../$id.git +refs/*:refs/remotes/$id/* > > git repack -Adl > > > > from each child to pick up any new objects to de-duplicate (our "mother" > > repos are not real repos at all, but just big shared-object stores). > > Yes, I keep thinking of doing the same, too -- instead of using > torvalds/linux.git for alternates, have an internal repo where objects > from all forks are stored. This conversation may finally give me the > shove I've been needing to poke at this. :)
I may have missed a few of the earlier messages, but in the last 20 or so in this thread, I did not see namespaces mentioned by anyone. (I.e., apologies if it was addressed and discarded earlier!) I was under the impression that, as long as "read" access need not be controlled (Konstantin's situation, at least, and maybe Peff's too, for public repos), namespaces are a good way to create and manage that "mother repo". Is that not true anymore? Mind, I have not actually used them in anger anywhere, so I could be missing some really big point here. sitaram
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
