Re: [Scons-dev] [Scons-users] SCons moves to GitHub! https://github.com/SConsProject/scons

Please recreate existing bitbucket pull requests on github. Thanks, Bill On Sun, Sep 24, 2017 at 4:19 PM, Tom Tanner wrote: > On 18/09/2017 22:12, Bill Deegan wrote: > > Greetings, > > Well the day has finally come. > > SCons is moving to Github and git. > >

Re: [Scons-dev] [Scons-users] SCons moves to GitHub! https://github.com/SConsProject/scons

On 18/09/2017 22:12, Bill Deegan wrote: Greetings, Well the day has finally come. SCons is moving to Github and git. Outstanding pull requests on bitbucket.org will need to be migrated to the new repo. by 'will need to be' do you mean 'there is stuff underway to

[Scons-dev] SCons repo recreated on github (yes this is the third one) PLEASE READ

Greetings, Anatoly and Dirk pointed out that we could shrink the size of the repo, thus speeding up cloning and reducing disk footprint and cloning time. So I've reconverted, re-cherry-picked changes from the first git repo, deleted the second repo, created a third repo, pushed the update repo

Re: [Scons-dev] SCons moves to GitHub! https://github.com/SConsProject/scons

You don’t loose anything by redoing the compression. I’m surprised the importer didn’t do that as the final pass. The issue is that as commits are added incrementally git sometimes can’t spot good compression choices. Running it after creation allows for more deltas to be examined. You will

Re: [Scons-dev] SCons moves to GitHub! https://github.com/SConsProject/scons

Also would I need to discard the current repo and create another to push this back to? On Sun, Sep 24, 2017 at 10:22 AM, Bill Deegan wrote: > I've not compressed a git repo before, do we lose any information? > > -Bill > > On Sun, Sep 24, 2017 at 7:54 AM, anatoly

Re: [Scons-dev] SCons moves to GitHub! https://github.com/SConsProject/scons

I've not compressed a git repo before, do we lose any information? -Bill On Sun, Sep 24, 2017 at 7:54 AM, anatoly techtonik wrote: > I pushed my repository to https://github.com/techtonik/sconsize > and now git clone downloads only 9 Mb instead of 100 Mb, > > $ git

Re: [Scons-dev] SCons moves to GitHub! https://github.com/SConsProject/scons

I pushed my repository to https://github.com/techtonik/sconsize and now git clone downloads only 9 Mb instead of 100 Mb, $ git clone https://github.com/techtonik/sconsize ... Receiving objects: 100% (50034/50034), 9.08 MiB | 1.48 MiB/s, done. Cloning official repo still takes 10

Re: [Scons-dev] SCons moves to GitHub! https://github.com/SConsProject/scons

Anatoly, this isn't quite correct. The figures you show here are for - removing the docbook folder, AND - compressing the repository. Your pastebin shows that you don't run a compression *before* removing docbook. If I do a fresh checkout: git clone

Re: [Scons-dev] SCons moves to GitHub! https://github.com/SConsProject/scons

Just removing docbook-xsl-1.76.1 brings compressed repository size from 110.50 MiB down to 10.45 MiB https://pastebin.mozilla.org/9068127 On Sun, Sep 24, 2017 at 10:50 AM, anatoly techtonik wrote: > HI Bill. > > History is ok, but repository size is now too big. > >

Re: [Scons-dev] SCons moves to GitHub! https://github.com/SConsProject/scons

HI Bill. History is ok, but repository size is now too big. Receiving objects: 100% (51561/51561), 109.12 MiB | 1.08 MiB/s, done. We should take the opportunity to clean up binaries and huge commits made by mistake. I am trying to see what are they. On Sat, Sep 23, 2017 at 10:37 PM, Bill

Re: [Scons-dev] SCons on github reopened for business. PLEASE READ DETAILS

Thanks to Bill for picking up all the work. Thanks to Anatoly for spotting the problem. I will have to admit I had assumed "fast import" and that everything was fine, and didn't even look. On Sat, 2017-09-23 at 21:59 -0400, Bill Deegan wrote: > Greetings, > > So thanks to Anatoly for pointing

Re: [Scons-dev] Hold off on pull requests against git repo until further notice

Bill, I would have used the "fast import" technique in the first place. ;-) I have no problem with ditching the current repo and replacing it. On Sat, 2017-09-23 at 15:54 -0400, Bill Deegan wrote: > Greetings, > > Looks like githubs hg->git repo dropped a bunch of history. > > I've done a