On Sat, Feb 20, 2016 at 12:51 AM, Warren Young <w...@etr-usa.com> wrote:
> On Feb 18, 2016, at 8:56 AM, Stephan Beal <sgb...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> >
> > s2> var m = c.loadManifest('current');;
> >
> > s2> foreach(m=>k) print(k)
>
> I wonder, would it be practical to use f-s2sh for repository sharding?
>
> That is, I want to take a single long-lived repo holding several projects
> and break it up into project-specific repos, each holding only the
> artifacts relevant to that particular project.
>
> Each project is strictly confined to a top-level directory in the repo, so
> selecting the relevant artifacts wouldn’t be difficult. It should even be
> easy to drop that extra directory level in the output repo, so that
> prj/path/to/file.cpp becomes path/to/file.cpp in the new prj.fossil repo.
>
Interestingly...
one of the benefits of having the library API is that we can experiment
with such things without breaking/relying on the core app. Some of Fossil's
SCM features can be used without the others, e.g. delta and diff generation
and application. Those work at a level which is independent of manifests
and such, and could hypothetically be used for constructing one's own SCM
features.
> I’d hoped bundles could do this, but even with --standalone, you don’t get
> a repo that can stand on its own.
>
i don't _think_ fossil's model can support that, but i've been known to be
wrong about such things.
--
----- stephan beal
http://wanderinghorse.net/home/stephan/
http://gplus.to/sgbeal
"Freedom is sloppy. But since tyranny's the only guaranteed byproduct of
those who insist on a perfect world, freedom will have to do." -- Bigby Wolf
_______________________________________________
fossil-users mailing list
fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org
http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
