From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 53182 invoked by alias); 21 Sep 2019 09:51:15 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 53174 invoked by uid 89); 21 Sep 2019 09:51:15 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.2 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 spammy=HX-Languages-Length:881, our X-HELO: gate.crashing.org Received: from gate.crashing.org (HELO gate.crashing.org) (63.228.1.57) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Sat, 21 Sep 2019 09:51:14 +0000 Received: from gate.crashing.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by gate.crashing.org (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id x8L9p7cT013715; Sat, 21 Sep 2019 04:51:08 -0500 Received: (from segher@localhost) by gate.crashing.org (8.14.1/8.14.1/Submit) id x8L9p6iZ013713; Sat, 21 Sep 2019 04:51:06 -0500 Date: Sat, 21 Sep 2019 09:51:00 -0000 From: Segher Boessenkool To: Andreas Schwab Cc: Jeff Law , "Richard Earnshaw (lists)" , gcc@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: Proposal for the transition timetable for the move to GIT Message-ID: <20190921095106.GY9749@gate.crashing.org> References: <1685e719-738f-dd4e-c39c-c08e495b202e@arm.com> <20190921091058.GV9749@gate.crashing.org> <87o8ze3s4l.fsf@hase.home> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <87o8ze3s4l.fsf@hase.home> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.3i X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2019-09/txt/msg00176.txt.bz2 On Sat, Sep 21, 2019 at 11:39:38AM +0200, Andreas Schwab wrote: > On Sep 21 2019, Segher Boessenkool wrote: > > > On Fri, Sep 20, 2019 at 09:49:36AM -0600, Jeff Law wrote: > >> With the SVN repo going read-only it becomes our fallback plan in case > >> of major unexpected problems. > >> > >> Joseph's recommendation for having the old objects/refs in the new repo > >> makes a lot of sense. So if it works, it's got my support as well. > > > > That potentially (and probably) makes the repository a lot bigger. > > Since all the blobs are identical the overhead will be very small. Are they though? > There is also the possibility to put the old refs in a different refs > namespace so that they are not cloned by default. Yeah, that is a good point (and a good idea), thanks. Segher