From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mga03.intel.com ([143.182.124.21]) by linuxtogo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1SAj65-000209-80 for openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org; Thu, 22 Mar 2012 15:34:37 +0100 Received: from azsmga001.ch.intel.com ([10.2.17.19]) by azsmga101.ch.intel.com with ESMTP; 22 Mar 2012 07:25:40 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.71,315,1320652800"; d="scan'208";a="121984097" Received: from unknown (HELO helios.localnet) ([10.252.123.227]) by azsmga001.ch.intel.com with ESMTP; 22 Mar 2012 07:25:40 -0700 From: Paul Eggleton To: Koen Kooi Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2012 14:25:38 +0000 Message-ID: <6449205.EIHV3lzBd1@helios> Organization: Intel Corporation User-Agent: KMail/4.8.0 (Linux/3.0.0-16-generic-pae; KDE/4.8.1; i686; ; ) In-Reply-To: <0E615ACC-662B-408B-BDAE-032723A55D15@dominion.thruhere.net> References: <1332250734-14660-1-git-send-email-koen@dominion.thruhere.net> <16657624.ejDoFzWrx1@helios> <0E615ACC-662B-408B-BDAE-032723A55D15@dominion.thruhere.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Cc: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org Subject: Re: [RFC v2][PATCH 1/3] buildhistory: record all builds X-BeenThere: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list Reply-To: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer List-Id: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2012 14:34:37 -0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" On Thursday 22 March 2012 11:35:30 Koen Kooi wrote: > After a few more days of usage I'm going to create a follow-up patch that > will do: > > 1) reinstate the global git status --porcelain and make a single, empty > commit if nothing changed instead of N empty commits. 2) either parse the > output of git status or re-run it to see which top level entries need to > get committed and only run 'git add ; git commit' on those. > > That will keep tracking all builds, but will be less noisy. But it will be > slightly slower when the OS doesn't cache the git status, but I decided > that I can personally live with that. > > So what do you think about that? Well, avoiding >1 empty commits sounds good. I'm happy to go with your assessment as you're more likely to be observing actual performance than me (I'm not really monitoring the performance of buildhistory on our autobuilder, only the output). FYI I didn't comment on the splitting into separate commits patch earlier because it doesn't really bother me either way. I do think people will find it easier to use the buildhistory-diff tool rather than looking at the git log directly (or the web-based equivalent when I finish that.); but I'm happy to continue supporting those that prefer to read the log. > If you like the idea, would you like it as follow up or as a respin of the > series? Since it hasn't been merged I'll go for a respin, if you don't mind. Cheers, Paul -- Paul Eggleton Intel Open Source Technology Centre