[Kde-scm-interest] Have we arrived to a dead end?

[John Tapsell]

2010/2/17 Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. <bss at iguanasuicide.net>:
> On Wednesday 17 February 2010 10:41:54 you wrote:
>> On Wednesday 17 February 2010 15:53:55 Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote:
>> > In <201002171345.29844.kde at michael-jansen.biz>, Michael Jansen wrote:
>> > >You want to move the core of kde. Make a real plan. Describe how modules
>> > > will be split.
>> >
>> > Splitting doesn't have to be done at the same time as the move to git.
>>
>> There will be some kind of splitting. Currently we have ONE repository with
>>  svn. We will have more than that.
>
> I think if you want the same atomic moves and moves-with-history that you get
> with ONE repository in subversion, that you'll probably need to go with ONE
> repository for git.
>
> I'm not convinced that we must decide how to split before we can move to git.
> I'm not even sure splitting is a good idea, if git can be extended with narrow
> and shallow clones.  That seems like something the git developers are already
> interested in so it might be better to put developer time toward that instead
> of some KDE SC-specific build system to weave all the splitting back together.


I'm not all that convinced we even need shallow clones.

The Gnome guys found shallow clones only saved a small amount of space:

The first size, in MB, is the full checkout, and second number is a
shallow clone of depth 1.

evolution 	204 	189
gtk+ 	193 	172
nautilus 	139 	108
gnome-games 	127 	120
gnome-applets 	110 	98
gnome-user-docs 	108 	102


Hardly seems worth the complication, let alone being a blocker wish,
for a 10% saving.  (Source
http://blogs.gnome.org/simos/2009/04/18/git-clones-vs-shallow-git-clones/
)

John