Re: Historical kernel repository size

From: Petr Baudis <pasky@suse.cz>
Date: Sep 14, 2006, 15:52 UTC
Message-ID: <20060914155231.GU18896@pasky.or.cz>
In-Reply-To: <45097775.4040005@shadowen.org>

Dear diary, on Thu, Sep 14, 2006 at 05:38:29PM CEST, I got a letter where Andy Whitcroft <apw@shadowen.org> said that...

> Is there any reason this isn't a live history.  ie that we don't
> constantly pull linus' master branch into this history to make it a real
> complete history?

Because at the early times of Git, things were evolving fast and it would be unfeasible to have to drag this old history around in case of format changes and stuff. Also, at that time history was still very big and it would be impractical to require all the kernel developers to grab all the bitkeeper history (it still kind of is).

> Perhaps that isn't possible ... hmmm.  I guess it might only work if
> linus' repo was actually a grafted version of this history?
> 
> /me watches his head explode.

	http://lkml.org/lkml/2006/6/17/110

may be useful.

It wasn't accepted. Oh well, I may try to resubmit it again soon. :-)

-- 
				Petr "Pasky" Baudis
Stuff: http://pasky.or.cz/
Snow falling on Perl. White noise covering line noise.
Hides all the bugs too. -- J. Putnam