d at falconindy.com
Mon Oct 7 10:44:49 EDT 2013
On Mon, Oct 07, 2013 at 09:47:18AM +0200, Massimiliano Torromeo wrote:
> What about handling mass-edits?
Really, how often do you do this? Why would your workflow be so
different? Instead of 'svn up', you'd 'git clone'. Instead of 'svn
commit', you'd write a for loop with 'git commit'. The actual editing
remains exactly the same.
> Right now I feel the approach of having one repo for core/extra and one for
> community with branches for testing would be better, my only issue with
> this being that I wouldn't tag each package release in it and I don't
> really see the need for it.
The fact is, git does not perform well with wide trees. In your world,
each branch would be fully divergent from the root. This leads to bloat
and poor performance. Switching branches would, over time, become
increasingly slow as you'd need to rebuild the entire tree. In essence,
you'd be poorly mimicking subtress, submodules, or repo-for-each, but
with a restricted feature set. Some git operations cease to make sense
in this sort of world -- tagging is less obvious, and branching would be
weird since you're in a restricted "namespace".
More information about the arch-dev-public