Re: VCS comparison table
- From
Sean <seanlkml@sympatico.ca>
- Date
- Oct 15, 2006, 18:39 UTC
- Message-ID
- <BAYC1-PASMTP036D3F961BC92DC72FAEF9AE080@CEZ.ICE>
- In-Reply-To
- <20061015182303.GW20017@pasky.or.cz>
On Sun, 15 Oct 2006 20:23:03 +0200 Petr Baudis <pasky@suse.cz> wrote:
Show 6 quoted lines
> (BTW, yes, grafting the old history could help this time, but it is a > hack and not a good long-term solution - it is just putting the real > solution away until the project history will re-grew. Periodical > regrafting is even worse hack, since at that moment you break > fast-forwarding and this kind of "restarting the history" breaks deep > into the Git distributiveness.)
But is there a better practical solution he can use today? I don't think there is. And the experience of the Linux kernel has shown that it's not really all that big a problem. You even made a nice script to help people do it! ;o)
It's probably not the solution that should be used _next_ time the repository grows too big, but it sure seems like the correct solution this time around. Not many people will want all that old history anyway (10+ years as i recall?).
Sean