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

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