On Sun, Dec 5, 2010 at 5:27 AM, Christoph Cullmann <cullm...@absint.de> wrote: > On Sunday 05 December 2010 05:30:53 Ian Monroe wrote: >> I've done a trial run of a kdelibs git conversion and published it here: >> http://gitweb.kde.org/scratch/ianmonroe/kdelibs-test.git >> It should have a fairly comprehensive history thanks to Torgny Nyblom >> trackModule.pl script. Feedback appreciated. >> >> The plan is do the git conversion at the same time kdepim does, on Dec >> 20th. >> >> One question is whether we want to have a separate 'history' repo, >> like what Amarok has. It is used to store inactive branches. The size >> savings for the main repo probably isn't much, but it does clean up >> the 'git branch -a' list. Another issue is what the Kate folks are >> planning, though I don't believe it should affect the git conversion. > Given kate history is small, I doubt it makes a big difference now to drop it > in this repo. > > Just convert whole kdelibs/base, later the dirs can still just be removed (if > consense reached). having history intact for kdelibs.
I'm of exactly the same opinion. The whole of kdelibs is 250mb, if deleting ktexteditor stuff made it smaller by more then a handful of megabytes I would be very surprised. So I don't see the point in doing so. Plus I don't really think there is a consensus on the 'kate rebellion', I'd rather just stay out of it. :) As far as I'm concerned, kdelibs converting to git changes nothing for the kate situation Ian _______________________________________________ Kde-scm-interest mailing list Kde-scm-interest@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-scm-interest