From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Linus Torvalds Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/15] git-note: A mechanisim for providing free-form after-the-fact annotations on commits Date: Mon, 28 May 2007 09:28:22 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: References: <200705271608.02122.johan@herland.net> <200705281254.23297.johan@herland.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=us-ascii Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, Junio C Hamano To: Johan Herland X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Mon May 28 18:28:50 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 1Hsi5P-0005bl-SS for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Mon, 28 May 2007 18:28:48 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1761759AbXE1Q2f (ORCPT ); Mon, 28 May 2007 12:28:35 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1762092AbXE1Q2f (ORCPT ); Mon, 28 May 2007 12:28:35 -0400 Received: from smtp1.linux-foundation.org ([207.189.120.13]:47190 "EHLO smtp1.linux-foundation.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1761759AbXE1Q2e (ORCPT ); Mon, 28 May 2007 12:28:34 -0400 Received: from shell0.pdx.osdl.net (fw.osdl.org [65.172.181.6]) by smtp1.linux-foundation.org (8.13.5.20060308/8.13.5/Debian-3ubuntu1.1) with ESMTP id l4SGSN6S006362 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Mon, 28 May 2007 09:28:24 -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 l4SGSMiL016750; Mon, 28 May 2007 09:28:22 -0700 In-Reply-To: <200705281254.23297.johan@herland.net> X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-3.023 required=5 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,OSDL_HEADER_SUBJECT_BRACKETED X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.0-osdl_revision__1.12__ X-MIMEDefang-Filter: osdl$Revision: 1.179 $ X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.53 on 207.189.120.13 Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Mon, 28 May 2007, Johan Herland wrote: > > > - This will probably scale horribly badly if you have tens of thousands > > of notes, even when they are packed. Do we care? > > 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. Linus