From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Linus Torvalds Subject: Re: Figured out how to get Mozilla into git Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2006 14:57:58 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: References: <9e4733910606081917l11354e49q25f0c4aea40618ea@mail.gmail.com> <46a038f90606082006t5c6a5623q4b9cf7b036dad1e5@mail.gmail.com> <9e4733910606091113vdc6ab06l2d3582cb82b8fd09@mail.gmail.com> <9e4733910606091317p26d66579mdf93db293f93fb50@mail.gmail.com> <9e4733910606091356w391b4fdao23db5b2ce3c3e282@mail.gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Cc: Martin Langhoff , git X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Fri Jun 09 23:58:27 2006 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FoozY-000248-3a for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Fri, 09 Jun 2006 23:58:09 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1030550AbWFIV6E (ORCPT ); Fri, 9 Jun 2006 17:58:04 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1030551AbWFIV6E (ORCPT ); Fri, 9 Jun 2006 17:58:04 -0400 Received: from smtp.osdl.org ([65.172.181.4]:42182 "EHLO smtp.osdl.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1030550AbWFIV6C (ORCPT ); Fri, 9 Jun 2006 17:58:02 -0400 Received: from shell0.pdx.osdl.net (fw.osdl.org [65.172.181.6]) by smtp.osdl.org (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id k59Lvxgt001923 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=EDH-RSA-DES-CBC3-SHA bits=168 verify=NO); Fri, 9 Jun 2006 14:57:59 -0700 Received: from localhost (shell0.pdx.osdl.net [10.9.0.31]) by shell0.pdx.osdl.net (8.13.1/8.11.6) with ESMTP id k59LvwSR031947; Fri, 9 Jun 2006 14:57:58 -0700 To: Jon Smirl In-Reply-To: <9e4733910606091356w391b4fdao23db5b2ce3c3e282@mail.gmail.com> X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0 required=5 tests= X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63-osdl_revision__1.75__ X-MIMEDefang-Filter: osdl$Revision: 1.135 $ X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.36 Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Fri, 9 Jun 2006, Jon Smirl wrote: > > They need the distributed thing whether they realize it or not. Some > of the external projects like songbird and nvu are vulnerable to drift > since they are running their own repositories. Once a few > move/renames happen they can't easily stay in sync anymore. It has > been over a year since NVU was merged back into the trunk. > > That is the same reason I want it, so that I can work on stuff locally > and have a repository. The core staff doesn't have this problem > because they can make all the branches they want in the main > repository. Yes. Anyway, I think we'll get git working well for repositories that size, and eventually the core developers will notice how much better it is. In the meantime, the fact that git-cvsimport can be done incrementally means that once we have the silly pack-file-mapping details worked out, it should be perfectly fine to run the 3-day import just once, and then work on it incrementally afterwards without any real problems. So people like you who want to work on it off-line using a distributed system _can_ do so, realistically. Maybe not practically _today_, but I don't think the git issues are serious enough that we'd be talking about "months from now", but more of a "in a week or so we migh have something that works fine for your case". [ They had this long discussion about languages on #monotone the other day, and the reason I'll take C over anything else any day is the fact that a well-written C program is literally only limited by hardware, never by the language. The poor python/perl guys may write things more quickly, but when they hit a language wall, they hit it. I think we've got an excellent data model, and handling even something huge like the _whole_ history of mozilla doesn't look very daunting at all. I just want to have a real test-case to motivate me to look at the problems. ] > It would be better to rsync Martins copy, he has a lot more bandwidth. > It will take over a day to copy it off my cable modem. I'm signed up > to get FIOS as soon as they turn it on in my neighborhood, it's > already wired on the poles. Sure. I actually just have regular 128kbps DSL myself. I guess I should upgrade to 256 (the downside of having deer munching on the roses in our back yard is that I don't think I even have the option for anything faster), but I'm so damn well distributed that the slow 128kbps is actually more than enough - everything serious I do is local anyway. So it will take me quite some time to download 2GB+, regardless of how fat a pipe the other end has ;) Linus