Re: [Gnu-arch-users] patch-log sizes

[Marco Zühlke]

On Tuesday 16 December 2003 23:51, Tom Lord wrote:
>     > From: Robert Collins <address@hidden>
>     >
>     > I just imported the automake CVS tree 's HEAD branch into arch (@
>     > http://people.initd.org/automake).
>     >
>     > Without a pristine, the {arch} dir takes up 16M, and the project tree
>     > including the {arch} dir takes up 25M.
>     >
>     > I suspect some users may find this disconcerting or worse.
>
> So, yes -- there are two issue here.
>
> One is:
[...]
>
> The other is log pruning.  Do I understand that you've made a tree
> that carries around several years worth of patch log history?  If that
> development had been done natively in arch, odds are that are along
> the way there would have been some discarding of old logs (perhaps
> stashing a ChangeLog of what's being discarded, for human readers).
> You might wnat your gateway program to emulate that.
>
> (Speaking of which, it's my plan to do some log pruning as I make the
> --2004 archives and start on the 1.2 line of arch.)
>
> -t

Is it essential to carry all the patch-log files in the {arch} tree?

For the history it would be much easier to consult a Changelog file (created 
on the fly by tla) and for merging (replay, update, star-merge) it is (as far 
as I know) only essential which patches are in and which not. So only the 
full qualified name is required. 

So the only thing {arch} would have to carry is a list of applied patches and 
not all the patch-logs. If you want any information which is only in the 
patch-log you could query the archive (or your mirror for reason of speed).

This is not a small change to tla but possible. It would it make even cheaper 
to have many src-trees lying around.

Am I missing something fundamental ???
Then correct me.....

cu Marco