On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 04:18:50PM +0200, Frédéric Delanoy wrote: > On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 15:50, Marcus Meissner <meiss...@suse.de> wrote: > > On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 02:42:29PM +0100, Ken Sharp wrote: > >> > >> > >> On 19/10/11 13:43, Frédéric Delanoy wrote: > >> >On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 14:08, Joel Holdsworth<j...@airwebreathe.org.uk> > >> >wrote: > >> >>Alternatively, have you considered doing a .tar.gz of every build > >> >>snapshot, > >> >>and placing that on a server somewhere? > >> >> > >> >>e.g. a folder full of 36def4af0ca85a1d0e66b5207056775bcb3b09ff.tar.gz > >> >>files? > >> > > >> >tar.xz would compress better > >> > >> tar.lzma? > > > > Having tars of all builds would be way larger I guess. GIT compresses and > > shares objects that are the same. > > > > Ciao, Marcus > > You're talking about using a git tree just to store binaries for each > committed patch, I suppose? > But then you would have to download the whole repository (which can be > quite big) to get compression benefits, right?
True, yes. Ciao, Marcus
