Re: Git GSoC 2014

2014-02-15 Thread Shawn Pearce
On Sat, Feb 15, 2014 at 4:17 AM, Thomas Rast wrote: > David Kastrup writes: > >> Thomas Rast writes: >> >>> Motivation: I believe that migrating to libgit2 is the better approach, >>> medium term, than rewriting everything ourselves to be nice, clean and >>> thread-safe. I took a shot a while a

Re: Git GSoC 2014

2014-02-15 Thread David Kastrup
Thomas Rast writes: > David Kastrup writes: > >> This definitely should not be "we'll think about it if and when that >> project is finished" material. > > Yes, all of this is true. However, you are painting a big devil on > the wall. [...] > Your scenario above mostly applies if and when we

Re: Git GSoC 2014

2014-02-15 Thread Duy Nguyen
On Sat, Feb 15, 2014 at 7:17 PM, Thomas Rast wrote: > It also includes an "ok" from Nicolas Pitre, who has been the driving > force behind packv5 development. The only thing that makes me uneasy is Nit: pack v4. You are probably confused with index v5, which is also cooking for a while now. > t

Re: Git GSoC 2014

2014-02-15 Thread Thomas Rast
David Kastrup writes: > Thomas Rast writes: > >> Motivation: I believe that migrating to libgit2 is the better approach, >> medium term, than rewriting everything ourselves to be nice, clean and >> thread-safe. I took a shot a while ago at making the pack reading code >> thread-safe, but it's a

Re: Git GSoC 2014

2014-02-14 Thread Jeff King
On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 04:10:37AM -0500, Jeff King wrote: > The Google Summer of Code application process is upon us. We have about > 34 hours until the deadline (2014-02-14T19:00 UTC) . That's not very > much time, but I know some people have been thinking about projects for > a while, so I have

Re: Git GSoC 2014

2014-02-14 Thread Vicent Martí
On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 10:45 PM, Thomas Rast wrote: > Replace object loading/writing layer by libgit2 > > Git reads objects from storage (loose and packed) through functions in > sha1_file.c. Most commands only require very simple, opaque read and > write access to the object storage. As a weat

Re: Git GSoC 2014

2014-02-14 Thread Jeff King
On Fri, Feb 14, 2014 at 10:30:28AM -0500, Ramkumar Ramachandra wrote: > > Isn't the merge backend faster? I thought that was the point of it. > > I suppose, but I thought git-rebase--am.sh (the default flavor) could > be improved by leveraging relatively new cherry-pick features; I > assumed that

Re: Git GSoC 2014

2014-02-14 Thread Ramkumar Ramachandra
Jeff King wrote: >> 1. Speed up git-rebase--am.sh > > Isn't the merge backend faster? I thought that was the point of it. I suppose, but I thought git-rebase--am.sh (the default flavor) could be improved by leveraging relatively new cherry-pick features; I assumed that the reason it was using form

Re: Git GSoC 2014

2014-02-14 Thread Jeff King
On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 06:17:17PM -0500, Ramkumar Ramachandra wrote: > I'll throw in a few ideas from half-finished work. Thanks. A few comments: > 1. Speed up git-rebase--am.sh > > Currently, git-rebase--am.sh is really slow because it dumps each > patch to a file using git-format-patch, and

Re: Git GSoC 2014

2014-02-14 Thread David Kastrup
Thomas Rast writes: > Here's my moonshot: > > --- 8< --- > Replace object loading/writing layer by libgit2 > > Git reads objects from storage (loose and packed) through functions in > sha1_file.c. Most commands only require very simple, opaque read and > write access to the object storage. As a

Re: Git GSoC 2014

2014-02-13 Thread Thomas Rast
Junio C Hamano writes: > Thomas Rast writes: > >> Downside: not listing "code merged" as a goal may not make the project >> as shiny, neither for Git nor for the student. > > I'd actually view that as an upside. This sounds like a good first > step for a feasibility study that is really necessar

Re: Git GSoC 2014

2014-02-13 Thread Ramkumar Ramachandra
Jeff King wrote: > - ideas ideas ideas I'll throw in a few ideas from half-finished work. 1. Speed up git-rebase--am.sh Currently, git-rebase--am.sh is really slow because it dumps each patch to a file using git-format-patch, and picks it up to apply subsequently using git-am. Find a way to sp

Re: Git GSoC 2014

2014-02-13 Thread Junio C Hamano
Thomas Rast writes: > Downside: not listing "code merged" as a goal may not make the project > as shiny, neither for Git nor for the student. I'd actually view that as an upside. This sounds like a good first step for a feasibility study that is really necessary. I wonder why the handling of st

Re: Git GSoC 2014

2014-02-13 Thread Thomas Rast
Jeff King writes: > - somebody to be the backup admin (I am assuming I'll be the primary > admin, but as always, if somebody else wants to...) I can be backup, if Shawn doesn't want it. > - ideas ideas ideas Here's my moonshot: --- 8< --- Replace object loading/writing layer by libgit