# [PATCH 0/8] git-repack --max-pack-size 4 messages from 2007-04-08 to 2007-04-09. Participants: Dana How, Nicolas Pitre. Thread: https://gitlist.dev/t/7569 ## Dana How, 2007-04-08 23:17 Subject: [PATCH 0/8] git-repack --max-pack-size Message-ID: <46197814.5010909@gmail.com> URL: https://gitlist.dev/e/46197814.5010909%40gmail.com ``` The three most common ways of making large packfiles are git-fast-import, the first git-repack, or git-repack -a. The first already supports a "--max-pack-size=N" option, which limits the resulting packfiles to N megabytes. This patchset adds the same option, with the same behavior, to git-repack to handle the other two cases. After reviewing others' comments, this latest patchset touches 2/3 fewer files and 1/6 fewer lines, and introduces no behavior not seen elsewhere in git. ``` ## Nicolas Pitre, 2007-04-09 02:33 Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/8] git-repack --max-pack-size Message-ID: URL: https://gitlist.dev/e/alpine.LFD.0.98.0704082229290.28181%40xanadu.home In-Reply-To: <46197814.5010909@gmail.com> ``` On Sun, 8 Apr 2007, Dana How wrote: > After reviewing others' comments, this latest patchset > touches 2/3 fewer files and 1/6 fewer lines, and > introduces no behavior not seen elsewhere in git. I'm starting to like it, but... I have some extensive changes that touch the same area more or less. And so far I think it might be easier to rebase your changes on top of mine rather than the other way around. So I'd like if my changes would be merged first and then yours to be applied afterwards. They still have some issues left anyway. I'm trying to format my changes now and send them tonight. Nicolas ``` ## Dana How, 2007-04-09 18:54 Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/8] git-repack --max-pack-size Message-ID: <56b7f5510704091154o2a52d563p1c0c72519447a1eb@mail.gmail.com> URL: https://gitlist.dev/e/56b7f5510704091154o2a52d563p1c0c72519447a1eb%40mail.gmail.com In-Reply-To: ``` On 4/8/07, Nicolas Pitre wrote: > On Sun, 8 Apr 2007, Dana How wrote: > > > After reviewing others' comments, this latest patchset > > touches 2/3 fewer files and 1/6 fewer lines, and > > introduces no behavior not seen elsewhere in git. > > I'm starting to like it, but... > > I have some extensive changes that touch the same area more or less. > And so far I think it might be easier to rebase your changes on top of > mine rather than the other way around. > > So I'd like if my changes would be merged first and then yours to be > applied afterwards. They still have some issues left anyway. > > I'm trying to format my changes now and send them tonight. Thanks for sending them out. I guess I'll update mine to apply after yours once yours show up in the appropriate branch. Thanks, -- Dana L. How danahow@gmail.com +1 650 804 5991 cell ``` ## Dana How, 2007-04-09 19:43 Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/8] git-repack --max-pack-size Message-ID: <56b7f5510704091243w2ef54809m339663b3fbf72ad6@mail.gmail.com> URL: https://gitlist.dev/e/56b7f5510704091243w2ef54809m339663b3fbf72ad6%40mail.gmail.com In-Reply-To: <46197814.5010909@gmail.com> ``` On 4/8/07, Dana How wrote: > The three most common ways of making large packfiles > are git-fast-import, the first git-repack, or git-repack -a. > The first already supports a "--max-pack-size=N" option, > which limits the resulting packfiles to N megabytes. > This patchset adds the same option, with the same > behavior, to git-repack to handle the other two cases. > > After reviewing others' comments, this latest patchset > touches 2/3 fewer files and 1/6 fewer lines, and > introduces no behavior not seen elsewhere in git. At the moment, I plan the following changes to this patchset: * Redo after 64b index applied (Nicolas) * Bad re-use of header around sha1write (Nicolas) * Set object_entry.offset before write_object (Dana) * Finish reducing struct object_entry (Junio) * Remove spaces from inside () (Junio) Concerning refactorings, I'd prefer to keep those in a separate (follow-on?) patchset. Thanks, -- Dana L. How danahow@gmail.com +1 650 804 5991 cell ```