That sounds a bit much. Shouldn't that be about the size of a
git-svn clone of the current subversion repository (1.5 GB)?
Did you purge the relics from git history rewrites?
a git repository should have a size similar to the subversion SERVER since it
contains all the history, not just
The git repository on SourceForge has 1.6 GB. Only the git checkout
has 2.6 GB (since it has a copy of all the data files outside of
.git).
On Thu, Mar 28, 2013 at 2:15 PM, Andrius Štikonas stiko...@gmail.com wrote:
That sounds a bit much. Shouldn't that be about the size of a
git-svn clone
On Mar 28, jeremy rosen wrote:
a git repository should have a size similar to the subversion SERVER since
it contains all the history, not just the subversion checkout
A git-svn clone does contain the full history. It basically is a
git repository with some extensions for svn interoperability.
So I had been meaning to follow up to this, but didn't have the time.
Fortunately, Gambit communicated further with Github and has had a more
positive response.
See http://forums.wesnoth.org/viewtopic.php?f=16t=38361p=550565#p550565 where
Github has given us a very clear green light.
I feel that
I have created such a poll here in the private Moderators' Forum section.
http://forums.wesnoth.org/viewtopic.php?f=16t=38590
Posted by David White on March 29, 2013 - 01:49
I feel that most developers are in favor of Github and we should move
there. If there is still doubt/controversy, I think
David White dave...@gmail.com:
So I had been meaning to follow up to this, but didn't have the time.
Fortunately, Gambit communicated further with Github and has had a more
positive response.
See http://forums.wesnoth.org/viewtopic.php?f=16t=38361p=550565#p550565
where
Github has given us
