I've worked with repo for ~1 year (working on android source), I'd say that it's relatively easy to use. Of course, there is always a possibility to break your tree or lose commits if you start doing things with it you don't understand fully - so, you either have to keep it simple or know what you're doing.
However, usually you end up with a shared build system - so, unless we reorganize the build structure a bit, it'd be hard to work on things without having a full repo checkout of wesnoth, with only 1 git repository checked out. On Sun, Feb 10, 2013 at 8:55 PM, Eric S. Raymond <[email protected]> wrote: > Mark de Wever <[email protected]>: >> From reading the GitHub website it looks like per repo. > > That's what I would expect. > >> Note when we want to split the repo to reduce its size it also means we >> have to historically remove those commits. It seems to be possible with >> git filter-branch as said by GitHub, but I'm what reluctant to start to >> modify the history. > > Don't worry about this part; reposurgeon has good primitives - more > powerful and easier to use than filter-branch - for splitting repositories > by subtree and branch. > > No commits will get removed per se, rather each one will be assigned > to exactly one of the offspring repositories. Well, unless we run > into a mixed-branch commit - those will get duplicated and one copy > will go to each git branch, possibly ending up in different offspring > repos. > > reposurgeon was specifically designed for situations like this; the > expunge and divide primitives have been repeatedly tested on > repositories with a more complicated branch structure than Wesnoth's. > That part should go without a glitch - the issue won't be whether we > can partition cleanly but how exactly we want to do it. > > There are SVN repository malformations that can confuse reposurgeon. > The worst is a branch delete followed by a branch rename recreating > the deleted branch. Also, various kinds of CVS scar tissue can cause > problems. But I'm pretty sure that the Wesnoth repo doesn't contain > any of this stuff. It might have an accidental mixed-branch commit > or two, but reposurgeon takes those in stride. > > The only issue I really expect with this conversion is one of sheer > size - I'm not sure my disk is large enough to hold all of (a) a > mirror of the Subversion repo, (b) the on-disk intermediate state that > reposurgeon keeps when it edits, and (c) the offspring git repos. I > have just implemented bzip2 blob compression in reposurgeon as a way > to substantially reduce the size of (b). > -- > <a href="http://www.catb.org/~esr/";>Eric S. Raymond</a> > > _______________________________________________ > Wesnoth-dev mailing list > [email protected] > https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/wesnoth-dev -- Cheers, Iurii Chernyi _______________________________________________ Wesnoth-dev mailing list [email protected] https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/wesnoth-dev
