Hi everyone, I did not mean to start a discussion about switching to github, gitlab or anything similar.
This is simply a request for a (small) improvement of the current infrastructure. Eli Schwartz has patiently explained the benefits in-depth. Thank you for this, Eli! As far as I know, there are no downsides to doing this, and it does not change existing workflows. As I do not know who maintains git.busybox.net, I sent this request to the busybox mailinglist. If someone knows who maintains git.busybox.net, I will gladly contact that person directly and spare everyone else on this list :-) Thank you Yannik On 14.04.20 02:35, Eli Schwartz wrote: > On 4/13/20 7:54 PM, Bernd Petrovitsch wrote: >> busybox - and thus the git repo - is small. >> What - apart from trolling - motivates "--depth=1"? >> To word it another way: What is a somewhat sane use-case >> for "--depth=1"? > It clones 3 MB instead of 28 MB, which is useful if you don't expect to > need history but would still like to submit patches or even directly git > push if you have commit access. It's a fairly large difference. It saves > bandwidth and decreases the time it takes in order to start working > rather than staring at a blinking cursor waiting to complete. > > It's also able to dynamically grow by using `git fetch --unshallow` to > retrieve the rest of the history, so there are no actual downsides to > using it when you don't need it. > > But never mind --depth=1, the original post also pointed out that modern > revisions of the git-over-http protocol support status messages such as: > > remote: Enumerating objects: 110424, done. > remote: Counting objects: 100% (110424/110424), done. > remote: Compressing objects: 100% (28074/28074), done. > remote: Total 110424 (delta 88325), reused 102158 (delta 81649) > Receiving objects: 100% (110424/110424), 27.51 MiB | 4.49 MiB/s, done. > Resolving deltas: 100% (88325/88325), done. > > It is also faster even without the depth setting (or rather, old-style > git-over-http is just really slow): > > $ time git clone git://git.busybox.net/busybox/ # no TLS validation > [...] > real 0m15.574s > user 0m10.526s > sys 0m0.606s > $ time git clone https://git.busybox.net/busybox/ # with TLS validation > [...] > real 2m12.699s > user 0m17.903s > sys 0m4.561s > > There are many good reasons to use modern versions of the wire transport > protocol instead of old versions, I'm actually extremely bewildered that > this is such a controversial topic. > > It really should not be controversial. It's a very simple, pure-benefit > request that simply depends on whether the person in charge of the > server infrastructure has a bit of time to switch it on and considers > such to be a useful way to spend that time. > > > _______________________________________________ > busybox mailing list > busybox@busybox.net > http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/busybox
_______________________________________________ busybox mailing list busybox@busybox.net http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/busybox
