Adam Holt wrote: > James Cameron wrote: > > George Hunt wrote: > > > The XSCE repo, inherited from laptop.org has grown to 80MB+. > > > > Yes, but what problem are you trying to solve? > > Preliminary Repo Re-org document here [...] > > https://docs.google.com/document/d/1wY2AwSfr0w712FhL9VY51Tpf9E39cBnOclVPU7_yzeg/edit
Thanks. Reviewed. Doesn't answer my question. Reorganisation there has nothing significant to do with the size of the repository. With that degree of reorganisation it may be better to start with fresh repositories. History of change can still be found in the old repository. I've not been watching the difficulties of your multiple committers, but my assessment, based on limited information (server-devel@ and the xsce/xsce.git commit log merge commits), is that your situation can be improved another way; ensure each contributor is able and willing to squash, interactive rebase, and resolve any kind of git-conflicts, using the best tools for the job. At Sugar Labs the Google Code-In just finished had quite a few contributors who had difficulty with these steps. Contributors vary considerably in their willingness to engage at that level. Your reorganisation looks like it will avoid conflict by avoiding collaboration. On the other hand, if that is the group's decision, then go for it. Nadia Eghbal's keynote talk yesterday at linux.conf.au is really relevant. Nadia is in Community Programs at GitHub. GitHub is the closed-source system you're using for contributor collaboration. https://linux.conf.au/schedule/presentation/106/ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W2AR1owg0ao Hope that helps! -- James Cameron http://quozl.netrek.org/ _______________________________________________ Server-devel mailing list Server-devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/server-devel
