From: Felipe Contreras Date: Sun, 21 Dec 2008 11:23:05 GMT Subject: Re: Memory issue with fast-import, why track branches? Message-ID: <94a0d4530812210323q2ae392d5o2381fd990be708e8@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <1229847042.798.5.camel@therock.nsw.bigpond.net.au> On Sun, Dec 21, 2008 at 10:10 AM, John Chapman wrote: > My first response was along the lines of "Why the heck are you storing > sha1's like that!?", until I realised that you're not storing actual git > sha1's, but mtn's hashes, which does make sense. Yes :) > I'm doing something very similar with my perforce scripts, however I am > doing a bit more magic instead of making so many branches. > > Instead of making branches, I make a tag instead, for each and every > changeset. Every time I make a new git commit, if I need to do it from > a tag, I first read the tag and determine the sha1 I should use, and use > that instead. Well, simple tags and branches are exactly the same thing: refs. tags are in 'refs/tags' and branches in 'refs/heads'; 'refs/mtn' are not really branches. > Alternatively, you could choose to manage your mapping yourself, and > write them to a .git/mtg-git-map file. The advantage of my approach is that the git tools handle all the mtn sha1's almost as good as git sha1's, I just need to prepend 'mtn/'. Also, git name-rev finds the mtn revision of a git commit. It' all so convenient. The only problem is that fast-import seems to be doing something wrong with those "branches". -- Felipe Contreras