From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Sam Vilain Subject: Re: Will git have a baseline feature or something alike? Date: Sun, 02 Mar 2008 02:20:35 +1300 Message-ID: <47C95823.5090006@vilain.net> References: <47C8FFFC.3050901@vilain.net> <200803011339.50978.jnareb@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-2 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: eric miao , git@vger.kernel.org To: Jakub Narebski X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Sat Mar 01 14:19:00 2008 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1JVRc9-0007wI-6A for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Sat, 01 Mar 2008 14:18:57 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756067AbYCANSV (ORCPT ); Sat, 1 Mar 2008 08:18:21 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1755991AbYCANSV (ORCPT ); Sat, 1 Mar 2008 08:18:21 -0500 Received: from watts.utsl.gen.nz ([202.78.240.73]:56625 "EHLO mail.utsl.gen.nz" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756043AbYCANSU (ORCPT ); Sat, 1 Mar 2008 08:18:20 -0500 Received: by mail.utsl.gen.nz (Postfix, from userid 65534) id C80B321D221; Sun, 2 Mar 2008 02:18:18 +1300 (NZDT) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.7-deb (2006-10-05) on mail.musashi.utsl.gen.nz X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.4 required=5.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED autolearn=failed version=3.1.7-deb Received: from [192.168.69.233] (203-97-235-49.cable.telstraclear.net [203.97.235.49]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.utsl.gen.nz (Postfix) with ESMTP id BFF6621D20D; Sun, 2 Mar 2008 02:18:14 +1300 (NZDT) User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (X11/20071022) In-Reply-To: <200803011339.50978.jnareb@gmail.com> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.0 Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Jakub Narebski wrote: > On Sat, 1 Mar 2008, Sam Vilain wrote: >> Jakub Narebski wrote: >> >>> BTW. the largest git repository is 1.6G OpenOffice.org conversion, >>> with > 2G checkout, and some large binary files under version >>> control. Mozilla and GCC, other large repos, got under 0.5G IIRC. >>> So kernel should be quite smaller. >> I have an 8GB git-svn import of the KDE repository :-) > > First, how large full checkout is? Heh, haven't tried tbh. > And how large Subversion repo? 48GB apparently. This repository is approx. 90% of the subversion repository - I didn't prepare it. > Second, is this repository tightly packed (large window, big delta > chain)? Yes, I don't have the details, though. > And last, KDE repos should most probably be split into submodules. Mmm. Everyone always says that; what it really needs I think is someone to really take the conversion on board and come up with a workable plan on this front. I think the counter-argument to this was "but you always want to have 70% of the repository checked out for development". Counter-counter argument is "yes but they don't always need to be deep clones". Anyway, it's not my baby, just thought I'd let you know about it :-) Sam.