This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the binutils project.
Re: Vendor branches on sourceware.org's binutils-gdb repo
- From: Mark Kettenis <mark dot kettenis at xs4all dot nl>
- To: matz at suse dot de
- Cc: brobecker at adacore dot com, aaro dot koskinen at iki dot fi, sergiodj at redhat dot com, emachado at linux dot vnet dot ibm dot com, gdb at sourceware dot org, binutils at sourceware dot org, bergner at vnet dot ibm dot com, tuliom at linux dot vnet dot ibm dot com
- Date: Mon, 7 Apr 2014 16:52:21 +0200 (CEST)
- Subject: Re: Vendor branches on sourceware.org's binutils-gdb repo
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <53406399 dot 9050303 at linux dot vnet dot ibm dot com> <m3vbunyoza dot fsf at redhat dot com> <20140406191404 dot GC7558 at drone dot musicnaut dot iki dot fi> <20140407035120 dot GA4186 at adacore dot com> <alpine dot LNX dot 2 dot 00 dot 1404071623060 dot 23408 at wotan dot suse dot de>
> Date: Mon, 7 Apr 2014 16:27:22 +0200 (CEST)
> From: Michael Matz <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> On Sun, 6 Apr 2014, Joel Brobecker wrote:
> > > I think it's very useful for users to have all vendor branches in a
> > > single repository. At least with glibc this has helped me a lot (as a
> > > user) when identifying and cherry-picking needed fixes to my own
> > > systems.
> > FWIW: I have found that the extra branches are just making me download
> > lots of commits that I have no use for, and I suspect that this is the
> > case for many of us. That's the default behavior, and most users will be
> > impacted by those. While it's convenient, it is also very easy to pull a
> > branch from another repository.
> But it's not necessarily easy for the vendor to _host_ that other
Really? Are there really companies that are active in the Free
Software community that don't have the infrastructure to host a
relatively small git repo?
> And IMHO, the current 288 MB for binutils-gdb git objects aren't
> enough to discourage vendor branches (and if you're worried about
> the download size it's equally easy to simply not pull those
Size is an issue for me. I try to support GDB on many platforms, some
of which are somewhat old or low power and don't have a lot of disk
storage. I'm already running into problems on some of my machines.
And every time git messes up my repo because I run out of disk space
(or just because it doesn't seem to properly implement DWIM) I need to
fetch everything all over again.
So how do I tell git to only clone master and not give me everybody
else's shit? Last time I tried to do that, it simply didn't work.