Summary/Minutes from today's FESCO meeting (2011-12-12 at 1800 UTC)
J. Bruce Fields
bfields at redhat.com
Tue Dec 13 19:06:34 UTC 2011
On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 01:22:06PM -0800, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 10:47:53PM +0200, Ville Skyttä wrote:
> > On 12/12/2011 10:29 PM, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> > > Patches should never be in the lookaside cache, because
> > > it is very difficult to view them.
> > IMO if that'd be a consideration, the lookaside cache shouldn't really
> > exist at all, everything should be in git instead.
> To some extent I agree with both sgallagh's sentiment and the logical
> conclusion you're drawing. However, I think the lookaside cache is
> a necessary optimization/compromise to the ideal of putting everything into
> version control, though. Current technology would make it prohibitive in
> terms of packager time (and for some packages, space on developer's
> machines) to put tarballs into git as the cloned repository would then
> contain every single new tarball the package ever had.
I'd be curious to know how expensive that actually was.
I'd think delta-compression could make it quite reasonable for the
typical project. (Exceptions including things like games with lots of
binary data in each release.)
> So I think for me, lookaside isn't there to separate data from upstream from
> data generated by Fedora -- it's there to supplement the SCM when a file is
> not suitable for direct inclusion into the SCM.
> devel mailing list
> devel at lists.fedoraproject.org
More information about the devel