threads / discuss / 244

[git pasky] tarball question

Subject: [git pasky] tarball question

## tl;dr

5 messages between Apr 22, 2005 and Apr 22, 2005.

replies: 4people: 3as markdown or json

Martin Schlemmer· Apr 22, 2005, 14:31 UTC · lore

Hi,

I understand why you have the git-pasky-0.6.x.tar.bz2 tarballs with the .git database included as well (btw, great stuff renaming it to something more distributable), but its going to be a pita for users of source based distro's like us (Gentoo), as well as our mirrors if it gets much bigger. (Already asked r3pek to add it to portage).

How about ripping the .git directory from the next release, and just have a un-numbered tarball (like you used to) that have the latest snapshot of the .git directory for those that want to do git-pasky development? Should even make things easier your side, as you could just do a cron to update it one a day/whatever.

Thanks,

-- 
Martin Schlemmer

Greg KH· Apr 22, 2005, 18:23 UTC · re: Martin Schlemmer · lore

Re: [git pasky] tarball question

On Fri, Apr 22, 2005 at 04:31:43PM +0200, Martin Schlemmer wrote:

Show 7 quoted lines

> Hi,
> 
> I understand why you have the git-pasky-0.6.x.tar.bz2 tarballs with
> the .git database included as well (btw, great stuff renaming it to
> something more distributable), but its going to be a pita for users of
> source based distro's like us (Gentoo), as well as our mirrors if it
> gets much bigger. (Already asked r3pek to add it to portage).

Ah good, I was already makeing a ebuild for it, I'll let others do it then :)

Show 5 quoted lines

> How about ripping the .git directory from the next release, and just
> have a un-numbered tarball (like you used to) that have the latest
> snapshot of the .git directory for those that want to do git-pasky
> development?  Should even make things easier your side, as you could
> just do a cron to update it one a day/whatever.

Why? The .git directory doesn't hurt anything that gentoo would do, we would just update the ebuild for the major releases.

thanks,

greg k-h

Martin Schlemmer· Apr 22, 2005, 18:51 UTC · re: Greg KH · lore

Re: [git pasky] tarball question

On Fri, 2005-04-22 at 11:23 -0700, Greg KH wrote:

> On Fri, Apr 22, 2005 at 04:31:43PM +0200, Martin Schlemmer wrote:

Hi,

Show 9 quoted lines

> > How about ripping the .git directory from the next release, and just
> > have a un-numbered tarball (like you used to) that have the latest
> > snapshot of the .git directory for those that want to do git-pasky
> > development?  Should even make things easier your side, as you could
> > just do a cron to update it one a day/whatever.
> 
> Why?  The .git directory doesn't hurt anything that gentoo would do, we
> would just update the ebuild for the major releases.
>

True, but the tarball was already nearing 2mb (the one before the versioned tarballs I still have here, is about 1.8mb), and I was just afraid of what might have happened size wise by the time it hit version 1.0 :)

Thanks,

-- 
Martin Schlemmer

Petr Baudis· Apr 22, 2005, 22:42 UTC · re: Martin Schlemmer · lore

Re: [git pasky] tarball question

Dear diary, on Fri, Apr 22, 2005 at 04:31:43PM CEST, I got a letter where Martin Schlemmer <azarah@nosferatu.za.org> told me that...

> Hi,

Hi,

Show 5 quoted lines

> I understand why you have the git-pasky-0.6.x.tar.bz2 tarballs with
> the .git database included as well (btw, great stuff renaming it to
> something more distributable), but its going to be a pita for users of
> source based distro's like us (Gentoo), as well as our mirrors if it
> gets much bigger. (Already asked r3pek to add it to portage).

yes; that was actually the plan, it's just that my memory is so volatile...

Show 5 quoted lines

> How about ripping the .git directory from the next release, and just
> have a un-numbered tarball (like you used to) that have the latest
> snapshot of the .git directory for those that want to do git-pasky
> development?  Should even make things easier your side, as you could
> just do a cron to update it one a day/whatever.

Does it actually make sense to keep a tarball with history? Just build git-pasky and do git init. (Or rsync it manually.)

-- 
				Petr "Pasky" Baudis
Stuff: http://pasky.or.cz/
C++: an octopus made by nailing extra legs onto a dog. -- Steve Taylor

Martin Schlemmer· Apr 22, 2005, 23:09 UTC · re: Petr Baudis · lore

Re: [git pasky] tarball question

On Sat, 2005-04-23 at 00:42 +0200, Petr Baudis wrote:

Show 15 quoted lines

> Dear diary, on Fri, Apr 22, 2005 at 04:31:43PM CEST, I got a letter
> where Martin Schlemmer <azarah@nosferatu.za.org> told me that...
> > Hi,
> 
> Hi,
> 
> > I understand why you have the git-pasky-0.6.x.tar.bz2 tarballs with
> > the .git database included as well (btw, great stuff renaming it to
> > something more distributable), but its going to be a pita for users of
> > source based distro's like us (Gentoo), as well as our mirrors if it
> > gets much bigger. (Already asked r3pek to add it to portage).
> 
> yes; that was actually the plan, it's just that my memory is so
> volatile...
>

Yep, saw before you posted about the change in URL, thanks.

Show 9 quoted lines

> > How about ripping the .git directory from the next release, and just
> > have a un-numbered tarball (like you used to) that have the latest
> > snapshot of the .git directory for those that want to do git-pasky
> > development?  Should even make things easier your side, as you could
> > just do a cron to update it one a day/whatever.
> 
> Does it actually make sense to keep a tarball with history? Just build
> git-pasky and do git init. (Or rsync it manually.)
>

Well, I did not know about kernel.org hosting it, so I thought it might help due to your reasons for initially tarballing the whole thing =)

Thanks,

-- 
Martin Schlemmer