On Thursday 4. December 2008 17:40:16 Raul Fernandes wrote:
> 2008/12/4 Thiago Macieira <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > It's nowhere near that much.
> >
> > The largest modules are 250 MB (koffice, kdelibs), then it quickly drops.
> >
> > The Linux kernel is right now at 190 MB. And remember that the Qt4
On Thursday 04 December 2008 18:36:34 Johannes Sixt wrote:
> Have you ever had the chance to appreciate git's code archeology
> capabilities? It's just the contrary: Project history is worth every ton
> once you look at a piece of code and you have to ask "why the heck was
> this done this way?"
I
Raul Fernandes schrieb:
> 2008/12/4 Johannes Sixt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
>> because if a fix is applied to the oldest live branch, then it will have
>> to be merged into the later live branches:
>
> I think that the fixes is generally backported, not the way you said.
> In any case, the merge is
On Thursday 04 December 2008 18:00:57 Raul Fernandes wrote:
> > because if a fix is applied to the oldest live branch, then it will have
> > to be merged into the later live branches:
>
> I think that the fixes is generally backported, not the way you said.
> In any case, the merge is not the solut
2008/12/4 Johannes Sixt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> because if a fix is applied to the oldest live branch, then it will have
> to be merged into the later live branches:
I think that the fixes is generally backported, not the way you said.
In any case, the merge is not the solution. It has to be
cherr
2008/12/4 Thiago Macieira <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> It's nowhere near that much.
>
> The largest modules are 250 MB (koffice, kdelibs), then it quickly drops.
>
> The Linux kernel is right now at 190 MB. And remember that the Qt4 port
> started three and a half years ago, around revision 44. Meani
Thiago Macieira schrieb:
> Actually, 4.0 is closed for development and 4.1 will close very soon (when
> 4.2
> is released). The only chances of those moving again are security fixes.
But if SVN is read-only you can't apply fixes there, and you *have* to
keep 4.0, 4.1 alive in git, and merge 4.0-
On Thursday 04 December 2008 14:46:56 Johannes Sixt wrote:
> Raul Fernandes schrieb:
> > Having the all history is a good idea a priori, but
> > it will consume a lot of space to a totally unnecessary thing.
> > Actually, garbage for the most of people.
> > We are working with Qt4, why do you need
On Thursday 04 December 2008 14:21:21 Raul Fernandes wrote:
> Some history is always good. How can I find what depth I should use??
> What is depth I should use to get all history from 4.1 branch point to
> current trunk (the 4.2 history)??
> See my point??
Git is very efficient at handling space,
Raul Fernandes schrieb:
> Having the all history is a good idea a priori, but
> it will consume a lot of space to a totally unnecessary thing.
> Actually, garbage for the most of people.
> We are working with Qt4, why do you need the history form Qt 1, 2 and
> 3 to be immediately available from you
On Wednesday 03 December 2008 22:46:43 Raul Fernandes wrote:
> Well, this is my 2 cents. I like to hear the opinions from other people and
> from Thiago, that leads the conversion to git. What do you think about it?
In any case, we already have the tool to do the conversion. It's just
incomplete
On Thursday 04 December 2008 14:04:59 Raul Fernandes wrote:
> The point of my idea is to convert only part of history. It doesn't
> need to be all the modules in one repository.
> Ok, split it up. No problem.
> Someone in the list said that his conversion from kdebase and kdelibs
> gets 700 MB for
> Thats why you do a clone with depth = 1, to only get the 20mb checkout instead
> of the 700Mb with full history.
The --depth=1 is not a good approach. This is from git documentation:
"--depth
Create a shallow clone with a history truncated to the specified
number of revisions. A shallow r
-- Forwarded message --
From: Raul Fernandes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 2008/12/4
Subject: Re: [Kde-scm-interest] ideas to git conversion
To: Robert Wohlrab <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> I don't think we must not copy that failure in linux history.
When you see a "copy failure", I see bloa
-- Forwarded message --
From: Raul Fernandes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 2008/12/4
Subject: Re: [Kde-scm-interest] ideas to git conversion
To: Thomas Zander <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
2008/12/4 Thomas Zander <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> On Wednesday 3. December 2008 22:46:43 Raul Fernandes wr
I don't know which version of linux repo do you use but I get my sources from
Torvalds repo and every version I need is in it. Older version from bitkeeper
time isn't there because tools for the conversation didn't exist when the
first development started inside the git repository.
There exist a
On Wednesday 3. December 2008 22:46:43 Raul Fernandes wrote:
> I think the repositories should be arranged like linux kernel. The git
> contains only one part of history (I think is 2.5.something to now) and the
> rest of history remains in another server if anyone wants to see the log.
you can st
On Wednesday 03 December 2008 22:46:43 Raul Fernandes wrote:
> This way, it is feasible to put all kde modules in only
> one repository without bloating it.
~/src/kde4 $ find \! -path '*/.git*' | wc -l
152587
~/src/kde4 $ for git in */.git/ */*/.git; do (cd $git/.. && git ls-files);
done | wc -l
18 matches
Mail list logo
