Re: git svn's performance on cloning mono's branches/tags...

From: Eric Wong <normalperson@yhbt.net>
Date: Jul 2, 2009, 08:16 UTC
Message-ID: <20090702081615.GB11119@dcvr.yhbt.net>
In-Reply-To: <3ace41890906272008t96bfb04q7218e95055897900@mail.gmail.com>

Hin-Tak Leung <hintak.leung@gmail.com> wrote:

Show 9 quoted lines

> On Sat, Jun 27, 2009 at 2:17 AM, Hin-Tak Leung<hintak.leung@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> > the tags, branches, url entries are effectively the same, I think - so
> > the main difference is using trunk instead of fetch.
> > Why does it make any difference? The example at the bottom of
> > git-svn's man page uses the trunk notation. Maybe it should be
> > changed?
> 
> To answer my question - I think the man page should be updated.

Somebody actually fixed it a while back:

commit 0e5e69a355b7bdd1af6ca33ac7ee35299bda368e
Author: Wesley J. Landaker <wjl@icecavern.net>
Date:   Wed Apr 1 16:05:01 2009 -0600

    Documentation: git-svn: fix trunk/fetch svn-remote key typo

As far as performance goes, SVN's flexibility of tagging and having multiple subprojects interacts quite badly with git svn's --stdlayout behavior.

With --stdoulayout, git svn supports tags/branches that are directly descended from the top-level of trunk:

	svn cp $root/trunk $root/tags/0.1.0

However, it looks like mono does things like this:

	svn cp $root/trunk/mono $root/tags/mono-0.1.0

And when git svn sees that $root/tags/mono-0.1.0's parent is $root/trunk/mono and not $root/trunk (which it's actually following), it will try to fetch the complete history of $root/trunk/mono ($root/trunk may not contain all the history $root/trunk/mono contained, either).

-- 
Eric Wong