sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Public SourceMage Discussion List
List archive
- From: "Jeremy Blosser (emrys)" <jblosser-smgl AT firinn.org>
- To: "sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org" <sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org>
- Subject: Re: [SM-Discuss] using git for grimoires
- Date: Sat, 8 Apr 2006 14:53:33 -0500
On Apr 08, Pieter Lenaerts [e-type AT sourcemage.org] wrote:
> > > * scalibility: it is madness to let all our devs have the full history
> > > of the grimoire on their hd's
> >
> > FWIW, Tony reports the entire P4 repository and its history currently
> > consumes ~3.5G of disk.
>
> madness, both for user and server bandwith
> we need light clients for sure
(*See also my other reply, sent about the time you sent this.)
Culture check, are decent-sized drives hard to come by over there? Here,
it's < $1 USD per GB for most drives. It's difficult to find things less
than 80GB new, but most people I know have boxes of 20GB drives sitting
around.
If you meant insane for network overhead, as I noted in my other post, I
prefer it decentralized as far as those things are concerned. It costs a
bit up front but the ongoing is easier. And even if we add new devs all
the time (it would be nice), the main server doesn't have to take the load
of that since a new person should be able to take their copy from any other
dev. Heck we could probably find a way to put it up as a BT tracker if we
wanted to.
Alternately, though, consider this: my plans are to at some point make our
existing server into multiple virtual servers. At that time the scm will
run on an isolated VM, and all "full" devs will be able to have login
access to it. So if people really wanted to, they could just have their
work repository on the server itself. git allows multiple local copies of
one repository to use hard links for the object (history/meta/etc.) files,
so there's only one copy on disk. You'd need network access to do any real
work if you did it that way, but that's where you are with a
completely centralized system like perforce anyway. And of course if you
wanted to you could use both a central copy and a copy on your end,
depending on the day of the week/etc.
> > > could you elaborate on the server options? how do they fix their pushes
> > > and pulls to a central repository? we need this done well for the
> > > grimoire.
> >
> > There is a daemon to handle pushes if you run it centralized.
> >
> > Probably best for some people to just install it and try it out and see
> > what happens for real.
>
> some people will then
I have git installed and am looking at it between other things, I think
dkowis and ruskie do as well. Arwed's been out a few days but I think he's
back now so hopefully he'll have some comments about the previous bzr
questions and perhaps git as well.
Attachment:
pgpWWRThd0Ci6.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-
[SM-Discuss] using git for grimoires,
David Brown, 04/07/2006
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] using git for grimoires,
Jeremy Blosser (emrys), 04/07/2006
- Re: [SM-Discuss] using git for grimoires, David Brown, 04/07/2006
- Re: [SM-Discuss] using git for grimoires, Jeremy Kolb, 04/07/2006
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] using git for grimoires,
Pieter Lenaerts, 04/08/2006
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] using git for grimoires,
Jeremy Blosser (emrys), 04/08/2006
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] using git for grimoires,
Pieter Lenaerts, 04/08/2006
- Re: [SM-Discuss] using git for grimoires, Jeremy Blosser (emrys), 04/08/2006
- Re: [SM-Discuss] using git for grimoires, Jeremy Blosser (emrys), 04/08/2006
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] using git for grimoires,
Pieter Lenaerts, 04/08/2006
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] using git for grimoires,
Jeremy Blosser (emrys), 04/08/2006
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] using git for grimoires,
Jeremy Blosser (emrys), 04/07/2006
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.