On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 11:35:47AM -0300, Ángel Velásquez wrote: > 2011/8/24 Florian Pritz <bluewind@xxxxxxx>: > > So it came up in IRC again and I'll try to sum up the discussion: > > > > SVN checkouts tend to break, some people only use it for our repos and > > not anywhere else, it's slow. > > > > We agreed on one git repo per package because you can't do partial > > checkouts in git and you hardly need the history of all packages anyway. > > > > To keep track of released packages, dbscripts maintains it's own (git?) > > meta database which contains only the package version and pacman repo of > > the package. The version corresponds to a tag in the package's git repo. > > > > We can't use tags like "testing-i686" because you can't reuse tags in git. > > > > I'd like to hear some comments about this. > > > > -- > > Florian Pritz > > > > > > First I need to ask some questions (understant that I don't get why is > this getting proposed) > > Well, why are us needing of git? what goal we want to achieve? .. > > Devtools have some complications (X number of commits for package i.e) > but, this will change with git? how? .. it will git increase the speed > or the workflow of our devtools? why git, not hg, darcs or another > DVCS? Dan and me worked on some patches to reduce the number of commits recently [1], [2], [3] and devtools-git only commits twice per commitpkg invocation. First commit to push changes to trunk, second commit to release to the repositories. Note that this has some impacts on speed. This is mostly related to SVN and the way we need to create tags when releasing to the repositories with a single commit. I pointed that out in a separate thread on arch-projects [4] but I sadly didn't get any feedback yet. Maybe this should be considered, also. Not that I have a strong feeling about it. I just thought I should mention it. [1] http://projects.archlinux.org/devtools.git/commit/?id=8384ad84 [2] http://projects.archlinux.org/devtools.git/commit/?id=6ef4d5f3 [3] http://projects.archlinux.org/devtools.git/commit/?id=61010062 [4] http://mailman.archlinux.org/pipermail/arch-projects/2011-August/001748.html
