From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Mike Hommey Subject: Re: fast-import deltas Date: Wed, 2 Apr 2014 13:13:46 +0900 Message-ID: <20140402041346.GB15690@glandium.org> References: <20140401102554.GA32231@glandium.org> <20140401114502.GA15549@sigill.intra.peff.net> <20140401130703.GA1479@glandium.org> <20140401131512.GA19321@sigill.intra.peff.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: git@vger.kernel.org To: Max Horn X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Thu Apr 03 12:35:38 2014 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1WVeI6-0006sp-0k for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Thu, 03 Apr 2014 11:50:34 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754482AbaDBENx (ORCPT ); Wed, 2 Apr 2014 00:13:53 -0400 Received: from ks3293202.kimsufi.com ([5.135.186.141]:50324 "EHLO zenigata.glandium.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754218AbaDBENw (ORCPT ); Wed, 2 Apr 2014 00:13:52 -0400 Received: from glandium by zenigata.glandium.org with local (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1WVCYc-0004Cw-G0; Wed, 02 Apr 2014 13:13:46 +0900 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-GPG-Fingerprint: 182E 161D 1130 B9FC CD7D B167 E42A A04F A6AA 8C72 User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Wed, Apr 02, 2014 at 01:29:13AM +0200, Max Horn wrote: > > On 01.04.2014, at 15:15, Jeff King wrote: > > > On Tue, Apr 01, 2014 at 10:07:03PM +0900, Mike Hommey wrote: > > > >>> For my own curiosity, how does this differ from what is in > >>> contrib/remote-helpers/git-remote-hg? > >> > >> contrib/remote-helpers/git-remote-hg does a local mercurial clone > >> before doing the git conversion. While this is not really a problem > >> for most mercurial projects, it tends to be slow with big ones, > >> like the firefox source code. What I'm aiming at is something that > >> can talk directly to a remote mercurial server. > > > > Ah, that makes sense. Thanks for explaining. > > > Hm, myself, I am not quite convinced. Yes, there is an overhead, but > it is one-time (well, the space overhead is not, but Mike only > mentioned time, not space). I didn't mention it, but it definitely is a factor. As for the performance factor, it certainly is more than a one-time overhead. > I wonder if it is really worth the effort > to start yet another project on this... Moreover, I don't see a > fundamental reason why one could not modify git-remote-hg to work this > way. The way git-remote-hg works is fundamentally different to how one can directly get and push stuff to a remote mercurial server. As such, there is not much value in the current git-remote-hg code for that purpose. Also, I'm currently prototyping something to see whether what I think should work really works. Starting from the current git-remote-hg code would add useless constraints to the prototype. Mike