LOL! Didn't the chromium people did just that earlier?
On 25 February 2017 at 02:12, Alex Ionescu <ion...@videotron.ca> wrote: > I think I'm going to upload two PDF files to prove my point. > > On Thu, Feb 16, 2017 at 11:25 PM Hermès BÉLUSCA-MAÏTO < > hermes.belu...@sfr.fr> wrote: > >> Hi ! Here are some thoughts as an answer to Ziliang's mail: >> >> > De : Ros-dev [mailto:ros-dev-boun...@reactos.org] De la part de >> Zachary Gorden >> > Envoyé : jeudi 16 février 2017 23:03 >> > À : ReactOS Development List >> > Objet : Re: [ros-dev] Microsoft switched to Git >> >> > The fact that git has problems maintain a large history is ONE of the >> limitations that prompted them to develop GVFS. There are several comments >> on the first page in the discussion of the ars technica article on GVFS >> that talk about git's issues with long histories: >> > https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2017/ >> 02/microsoft-hosts-the-windows-source-in-a-monstrous- >> 300gb-git-repository/?comments=1 >> > I can't link directly to the comments, but if you search by user name >> you jump right to them. Two especially relevant ones are by smengler and >> zaqzlea. The one by zaqzlea is also rather interesting if Linux itself has >> truncated its own commit history, which is more than a bit disturbing from >> > my perspective. >> >> I guess that this 'truncated history' story happened when Linus switched >> to his newly-created Git the 16. April, 2005 : >> https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/ >> linux.git/commit/?id=1da177e4c3f41524e886b7f1b8a0c1fc7321cac2 >> because, if one believes what's written inside >> https://git.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/GraftPoint , "When Linus started >> using git for maintaining his kernel tree there didn't exist any tools to >> convert the old kernel history." Later on, when new features have been >> added to Git, people were able to create Git repositories of Linux' code >> before the 16/04/2005 Git transition, and then, to be able to see the whole >> Linux history, you need to use the so-called graft points. Examples are >> given here: >> http://stackoverflow.com/questions/3264283/linux-kernel-historical-git- >> repository-with-full-history >> https://archive.org/details/git-history-of-linux >> >> >> > We also see a few remarks by a guy calling himself scuttle22 who claims >> that truncating history and dropping it is "common practice" and >> acceptable. His original posts have all been downvoted to oblivion, >> presumably because others take a less lackadaisical perspective >> > on preserving history for purposes of documentation and accountability. >> >> This is possibly "common practice", maybe in order to reduce the git >> repos... In there: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/4515580/how-do-i- >> remove-the-old-history-from-a-git-repository , someone ask for example >> how to trim the history before a certain date, while the complete copy of >> history is kept in an archive repository.... >> >> >> I also take the occasion to mention the peculiar possibility, with Git, >> to have a repository having multiple roots ("initial commits"): for >> example, someone did the error once in the linux kernel repo: >> http://lkml.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/1603.2/01926.html . >> >> Best, >> Hermès >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Ros-dev mailing list >> Ros-dev@reactos.org >> http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev > > -- > Best regards, > Alex Ionescu > > _______________________________________________ > Ros-dev mailing list > Ros-dev@reactos.org > http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev >
_______________________________________________ Ros-dev mailing list Ros-dev@reactos.org http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev
