2010/2/17 Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. <b...@iguanasuicide.net>: > On Wednesday 17 February 2010 10:41:54 you wrote: >> On Wednesday 17 February 2010 15:53:55 Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote: >> > In <201002171345.29844....@michael-jansen.biz>, Michael Jansen wrote: >> > >You want to move the core of kde. Make a real plan. Describe how modules >> > > will be split. >> > >> > Splitting doesn't have to be done at the same time as the move to git. >> >> There will be some kind of splitting. Currently we have ONE repository with >> svn. We will have more than that. > > I think if you want the same atomic moves and moves-with-history that you get > with ONE repository in subversion, that you'll probably need to go with ONE > repository for git. > > I'm not convinced that we must decide how to split before we can move to git. > I'm not even sure splitting is a good idea, if git can be extended with narrow > and shallow clones. That seems like something the git developers are already > interested in so it might be better to put developer time toward that instead > of some KDE SC-specific build system to weave all the splitting back together.
I'm not all that convinced we even need shallow clones. The Gnome guys found shallow clones only saved a small amount of space: The first size, in MB, is the full checkout, and second number is a shallow clone of depth 1. evolution 204 189 gtk+ 193 172 nautilus 139 108 gnome-games 127 120 gnome-applets 110 98 gnome-user-docs 108 102 Hardly seems worth the complication, let alone being a blocker wish, for a 10% saving. (Source http://blogs.gnome.org/simos/2009/04/18/git-clones-vs-shallow-git-clones/ ) John _______________________________________________ Kde-scm-interest mailing list Kde-scm-interest@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-scm-interest
