After 2.9.7

[Boudewijn Rempt]

On Mon, 31 Aug 2015, Dmitry Kazakov wrote:

>
>             1) I'm ok with forking Krita repository. We already depend from quite few libraries from calligra libs. That is mostly, KoCanvasBase, KoDocumentBase, flake and pigment.From all four
>             only pigment looks
>             reusable enough for me to have a separate repo. In our code we hack quite a lot to adapt flake and document classes for our needs.
>
>             2) One more benefit of forking to another repository would be that the size of the repo would become lower (correct me if I'm wrong). Since "Krita for Cats" manual is still
>             semi-official way of building
>             Krita on some platforms this is really crucial for many users. Quite a lot of people still have GPRS or limited internet, so downloading 700MiB just to try Krita *is* a barrier.
>             Another problem is
>             translators. Basically, they need to have a full source tree around to be able to check where the string comes from.
> 
>
>       The repo size is one reason I'm actually considering to drop all
>       history. Create a fresh new repo with cleaned-up code only and start
>       again from commit 0. I know we check history a lot, but that history is
>       the history of Krita up to Krita 2.9.x, which is in the calligra repo.
> 
> 
> This will make our life really hard :(

Well, it's something to consider if size of the final repo is important.

Boudewijn