Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Also Gitney talked about annotating commits in the code-review thing.
> What's the expected notes density and distribution in that application?
Uh, try one note per commit in a project. A few merges won't need
a note, but nearly every single non-merge commit would.
Consider a project with a velocity of about 200 non-merge
commits/day; the object count goes up fast.
One idea we are starting to kick around might double or quadruple
that number. If we store metadata about every version of every
commit ever proposed to a project, we need a lot more notes than
commits. Right now we have this sort of distribution from one of
our servers:
versions | commits
---------+---------
1 | 9262
2 | 2626
3 | 1053
4 | 424
5 | 224
6 | 124
7 | 57
8 | 38
9 | 28
10 | 14
11 | 12
12 | 10
13 | 5
14 | 6
15 | 2
16 | 3
17 | 2
21 | 1
32 | 1
So most commits (66%) would have only 1 version (and 1 note)
related to them in the note tree, but if I use the same note tree
for final commits as individual revisions considered, at least 18%
of the commits in the final history of the project would actually
have two notes, and 7.5% would have 3 notes.
--
Shawn.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html