From: "Shawn O. Pearce" <spearce@spearce.org>
To: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>, Brad Larson <bklarson@gmail.com>
Cc: Jakub Narebski <jnareb@gmail.com>, git@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: gittogether session notes
Date: Mon, 1 Nov 2010 13:32:41 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20101101203241.GB22725@spearce.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20101101202643.GA6119@sigill.intra.peff.net>
Jeff King <peff@peff.net> wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 12:26:15PM -0700, Jakub Narebski wrote:
>
> > Below there are proposed talks which either weren't presented, or lack
> > notes / slides.
> > * Hudson and Gerrit integration
>
> Brad Larson talked about Hudson, and had slides. I don't seem to have an
> email address for him, though.
Brad, can you post your Hudson slides on the wiki?
> > * What's new on github: pull requests, git based wiki etc.
Tom talked about this, but there weren't any slides. He just
presented the web site and described what he was showing.
> > * Git and Big Files
John Hawley and I talked about this a bit, it probably makes sense
to take Avery's bup work and start to formalize it within core Git.
But yea, we didn't ever get around to debating the merits of a new
"sequence" object type vs. defining a new variant of the current
tree mode and reusing the current tree walking support to link in
the segments of the huge file.
I think it really depends on what older versions of Git will
do. If older Git versions would accept a different tree mode
(e.g. '040001') and treat them as normal trees, we could at least
use older Git servers for push/pull/fsck/gc without breaking the
repository. But doing a checkout would produce a directory of
segments, and updating a segment would break the directory mode.
But I suspect older gits will choke on that tree mode.
> > * git log -L demo, combination of log and blame
>
> Thomas did this, but it was mostly just showing off "-L".
And this is pretty cool too. I was pretty impressed by the flag.
> > * RefInsteadOf (discussion)
RefInsteadOf turned out to be a non-discussion. I asked the SEMC
guys what they wanted... and it turns out its already handled
somewhere else and they didn't realize it. They just needed to
use the fetch refspec in .git/config correctly. :-)
> > * git-always-on
This was the Qualcomm guys presenting how they use DRBD to keep
git in sync on multiple machines and implement quick fail-over when
there is a problem with the primary.
--
Shawn.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-11-01 20:32 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-10-29 18:05 gittogether session notes Jeff King
2010-10-29 18:06 ` Robin H. Johnson
2010-10-29 18:11 ` A Large Angry SCM
2010-10-29 18:21 ` Jeff King
2010-10-29 18:33 ` Tom Preston-Werner
2010-10-29 19:22 ` A Large Angry SCM
2010-10-29 19:26 ` Jakub Narebski
2010-10-29 19:46 ` Ilari Liusvaara
2010-10-30 10:41 ` Jakub Narebski
2010-11-01 20:52 ` Jeff King
2010-11-01 20:26 ` Jeff King
2010-11-01 20:32 ` Shawn O. Pearce [this message]
2010-11-01 20:36 ` Brad Larson
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20101101203241.GB22725@spearce.org \
--to=spearce@spearce.org \
--cc=bklarson@gmail.com \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=jnareb@gmail.com \
--cc=peff@peff.net \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).