On Sat, 2005-04-16 10:04:31 -0700, Linus Torvalds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:

> What do people think? I'm not so much worried about the data itself: the
> git architecture is _so_ damn simple that now that the size estimate has
> been confirmed, that I don't think it would be a problem per se to put
> 3.2GB into the archive. But it will bog down "rsync" horribly, so it will
> actually hurt synchronization untill somebody writes the rev-tree-like
> stuff to communicate changes more efficiently..
> IOW, it smells to me like we don't have the infrastructure to really work 
> with 3GB archives, and that if we start from scratch (2.6.12-rc2), we can 
> build up the infrastructure in parallell with starting to really need it.

3GB is quite some data, but I'd accept and prefer to download it from
somewhere. I think that it's worth it.

I accept that there are people out there which would love to get a
smaller archive, but at least most developers that would actually use it
for day-to-day work *do* have the bandwidth to download it. Maybe we'd
also prepare (from time to time) bzip'ed tarballs, which I expect to be
a tad smaller.


Jan-Benedict Glaw       [EMAIL PROTECTED]    . +49-172-7608481             _ O _
"Eine Freie Meinung in  einem Freien Kopf    | Gegen Zensur | Gegen Krieg  _ _ O
 fuer einen Freien Staat voll Freier BÃrger" | im Internet! |   im Irak!   O O 
ret = do_actions((curr | FREE_SPEECH) & ~(NEW_COPYRIGHT_LAW | DRM | TCPA));

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply via email to