dist-git status

[Jesse Keating]

On Wednesday 15 November 2006 09:31, Jim Meyering wrote:
> Jesse Keating <jkeating at redhat.com> wrote:
> > I've finally been able to convert all extras package modules/branches
> > (from FC3 and up) to git, much in the same layout as dist-hg (each
> > release "branch" being its own standalone repo (complete with inherited
> > history from devel/ branch at split time))
> >
> > I haven't yet started modifying Makefiles and plague to handle getting a
> > checkout of a package from a tag and building it.  That will probably
> > come next week.
> >
> > Some interesting comparisons:
> >
> > Time to convert from CVS to GIT:
>
> Did you use git-cvsimport?
> One invocation to convert an entire tree containing lots of
> individual package trees into a single git repository?
>
> > real    556m51.452s
> > user    32m36.370s
> > sys     68m29.753s
> >
> > Time to convert from CVS to HG:
>
> What tool did you use here?
> The only tool I've used is tailor, and back when I last used it,
> it was about 15x slower than git-cvsimport.
>
> > real    155m0.948s
> > user    84m18.080s
> > sys     41m5.246s
> >
> > Size of dist-git (with full repack -a -d):
> > 3.9G    /srv/git/extras
> >
> > Size of dist-hg (no extra processing):
> > 1.8G    /srv/hg/extras
> >
> > None of the above are really deciding factors in what to use, just some
> > interesting anecdotal observations.
>
> What version of git tools are you using?  I ask because newer versions
> typically produce smaller repositories.  And with newer versions of
> git-cvsimport, there is no need for a manual repack.  In conversions I've
> done, the need for a manual repack went away months ago.  It may well be
> that the incremental repacking now done by git-cvsimport ends up producing
> a much smaller repo than the old "repack-everything-at-the-end" technique.
> FYI, rawhide has git-1.4.2.4, with is only a few weeks old.
>
> Also, I can attest that the run times using the newer git-cvsimport can be
> far faster, with the incremental repack.  Otherwise, git would create so
> many files that you'd run into terrible file system performance problems.
> This depends on file system type.
>
> However, I agree that the initial conversion speed isn't a big deal,
> since you do it only once (or at least a relatively small number of
> times :-) after all.
>

See http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Infrastructure/VersionControl/dist-hg and 
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Infrastructure/VersionControl/dist-git for 
info.

git-core-1.4.2.4-1.fc6

-- 
Jesse Keating
Release Engineer: Fedora
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-maintainers/attachments/20061115/29cd9e7c/attachment.sig>