From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Johan Herland Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/15] git-note: A mechanisim for providing free-form after-the-fact annotations on commits Date: Mon, 28 May 2007 18:40:50 +0200 Message-ID: <200705281840.50814.johan@herland.net> References: <200705281254.23297.johan@herland.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, Junio C Hamano To: Linus Torvalds X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Mon May 28 18:41:10 2007 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1HsiHK-00004v-9M for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Mon, 28 May 2007 18:41:06 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751126AbXE1Qk7 (ORCPT ); Mon, 28 May 2007 12:40:59 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753820AbXE1Qk7 (ORCPT ); Mon, 28 May 2007 12:40:59 -0400 Received: from smtp.getmail.no ([84.208.20.33]:52476 "EHLO smtp.getmail.no" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751126AbXE1Qk6 (ORCPT ); Mon, 28 May 2007 12:40:58 -0400 Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.no-osl-m323-srv-009-z2.isp.get.no by no-osl-m323-srv-009-z2.isp.get.no (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-7.05 (built Sep 5 2006)) id <0JIR00203FO4RD00@no-osl-m323-srv-009-z2.isp.get.no> for git@vger.kernel.org; Mon, 28 May 2007 18:40:52 +0200 (CEST) Received: from smtp.getmail.no ([10.5.16.1]) by no-osl-m323-srv-009-z2.isp.get.no (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-7.05 (built Sep 5 2006)) with ESMTP id <0JIR00EMMFO3E420@no-osl-m323-srv-009-z2.isp.get.no> for git@vger.kernel.org; Mon, 28 May 2007 18:40:51 +0200 (CEST) Received: from alpha.herland ([84.210.6.167]) by no-osl-m323-srv-004-z1.isp.get.no (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-7.05 (built Sep 5 2006)) with ESMTP id <0JIR00DZJFO3KB50@no-osl-m323-srv-004-z1.isp.get.no> for git@vger.kernel.org; Mon, 28 May 2007 18:40:51 +0200 (CEST) In-reply-to: Content-disposition: inline User-Agent: KMail/1.9.6 Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Monday 28 May 2007, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > I can't see why the current implementation would scale any worse than an > > equivalent number of (annotated/signed) tags. But then again, the tag > > system might not have been designed with tens of thousands of tag objects > > in mind. :) > > Right. I was more thinking that this "notes" thing could potentially be a > very useful thing for some random workflow - using notes to indicate that > some commit has been vetted by somebody, for example (ie adding things > like "Acked-by:" after-the-fact, which happens for the kernel). > > And once you start using notes for something like that, I think you're > going to end up with a set of notes that grows with history, and > potentially grows quite quickly. > > So I can see people having thousands of tags, but usually you only tag > releases. In contrast, I can see notes being used not as a "per release" > thing, but closer to a "per commit" thing. And that kind of worries me, I > can see workflows where you end up having tons and tons of notes. > > But hey, maybe I just worry unnecessarily. I still don't see what makes note objects inherently more expensive than commit objects. Except for the refs, of course, but we're getting rid of those (at least replacing them with a more efficient reverse mapping). And even if we _do_ end up with 10 notes per commit, we could always design some kind of "supernote" that lets "git-gc" pack all the notes related to a commit into _one_ object. Have fun! ...Johan -- Johan Herland, www.herland.net