dist-git proof of concept phase 1 complete

[Daniel P. Berrange]

On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 10:59:52AM +0000, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 05:50:05AM -0500, Josh Boyer wrote:
> > On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 10:34:04AM +0000, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> > >On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 10:06:42AM +0000, Tim Waugh wrote:
> > >> On Tue, 2009-12-15 at 09:49 +0000, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> > >> > Why not put everything in a single git repository?
> > >> 
> > >> That would require every packager to check out the entire package set,
> > >> all revisions, all branches.  No thanks.
> > >
> > >Jesse can probably estimate for us how large this will be.
> > >
> > >I've found that git deals very well with large repositories that have
> > >lots of files and lots of history (kernel, qemu).  And you only ever
> > >have to download it once, since you can use "git fetch" to make local
> > >working copies.
> > 
> > A full git repo was 5.7G.  I sure as hell don't want to pull that down
> > when I'm only interested in a few packages.
> > 
> > (The CVS repo is 16G on the server side if you are wondering.)
> 
> Fair enough - it doesn't make sense since the combined repo would
> be so large.

I was wondering if you could set up some meta repository, which had a
GIT sub-module for each package, but it seems sub-modules always have
to specify an explicit commit hash so they wouldn't seemlessly follow
changes.

Daniel
-- 
|: Red Hat, Engineering, London   -o-   http://people.redhat.com/berrange/ :|
|: http://libvirt.org  -o-  http://virt-manager.org  -o-  http://ovirt.org :|
|: http://autobuild.org       -o-         http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :|
|: GnuPG: 7D3B9505  -o-  F3C9 553F A1DA 4AC2 5648 23C1 B3DF F742 7D3B 9505 :|