Juliusz Chroboczek wrote: >> In that case I'd just have normal repos on the web server, but another >> option would be to use a "smart" server that utilizes "darcs show >> contents" and "darcs show files". > > Am I the only person to have a restrictive quota on my web server?
Quite possibly... restrictive user quotas < 1GB seem to be a dying breed. ...and you can run your own virtual server for a handful of dollars a month, with nearly full root control. Maybe someone soon-ish (possibly me?) will even put together a cheap dedicated darcs repository host where very few if any projects will need to worry about repository size quotas... (That reminds me: I have some survey questions I've been meaning to post...) > No-pristine-tree repos are designed to have all the good features of normal > repos, but to use less space. None of the suggested alternatives do that. Actually, for hashed and darcs-2 formats --no-pristine-tree repos would be severely crippled: darcs now grabs the pristine first to ASAP get a view of the current/head state of the repository and then it lazily fetches patches to back-fill the patch history. This provides significant performance boosts, among other benefits... The new pristine.hashed format is much more space efficient than old pristine trees (as it can share hard-link copies amongst repositories as darcs has long shared patch files in that manner). Combined with --no-working-directory I believe that a hashed or darcs-2 format repo is going to use a bit less space than even --no-pristine-tree saved, at least in the case of many related repositories, with the added bonus that you don't have the performance loss of trying to recreate the pristine trees (nearly) every operation. So it should be great/amazing for push-only repositories. -- --Max Battcher-- http://worldmaker.net _______________________________________________ darcs-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-users
