[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Gnu-arch-users] Re: Are pristine trees really dead?
From: |
Tom Lord |
Subject: |
[Gnu-arch-users] Re: Are pristine trees really dead? |
Date: |
Wed, 17 Dec 2003 08:53:27 -0800 (PST) |
> From: Pau Aliagas <address@hidden>
> On Wed, 17 Dec 2003, Tom Lord wrote:
> > > And once this is in place:
> > > -kill all [in-tree] pristine-trees code
> > No way. Make it harder to invoke by accident, sure, but it has the
> > virtue of keeping the disk-space-mgt. problem very simple for some
> > kinds of application.
> Tom, I know it's a lot hell of code,
I admit that tla has become too large (~57K LOC in libarch) but I'm
not so sure than any one component of it counts as a hell of a lot of
code.
> but you shouldn't feel too attached to it anymore. If they are
> not needed, they are better off for all purposes. It's already
> difficult to explain what all the available caches (revlibs,
> cachedrevs) are to keep a useless one (pristines).
I don't think it's useless though I admit it's at this point a mostly
theoretical belief. I think they'll remain particularly useful for
some kinds of automated process.
> I'm all for killing them from the code too unless you are totally opposed
> to it (and have good reasons to convince me ;) I volunteer to rip them
> from the code if you accept it.
I don't think I would.
I will accept (and would prefer to review designs-for before code-for)
setting up default rev-libs automatically, changing the default to
`get', finer-grain control over greediness, and so forth.
-t
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Re: Are pristine trees really dead?, (continued)
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Re: Are pristine trees really dead?, Robert Collins, 2003/12/20
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Are pristine trees really dead?, Tom Lord, 2003/12/17
- [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Re: Are pristine trees really dead?, Pau Aliagas, 2003/12/17
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Re: Are pristine trees really dead?, Charles Duffy, 2003/12/17
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Re: Are pristine trees really dead?, Mark Thomas, 2003/12/17
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Re: Are pristine trees really dead?, Tom Lord, 2003/12/17
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Re: Are pristine trees really dead?, Tom Lord, 2003/12/17
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Re: Are pristine trees really dead?, Pau Aliagas, 2003/12/17
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Re: Are pristine trees really dead?, Charles Duffy, 2003/12/17
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Re: Are pristine trees really dead?, Pau Aliagas, 2003/12/17
- [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Are pristine trees really dead?,
Tom Lord <=
- [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Are pristine trees really dead?, Pau Aliagas, 2003/12/17
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Are pristine trees really dead?, James Blackwell, 2003/12/17
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Are pristine trees really dead?, Tom Lord, 2003/12/17
- [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Are pristine trees really dead?, Miles Bader, 2003/12/19
- [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Are pristine trees really dead?, Miles Bader, 2003/12/21
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Are pristine trees really dead?, Tom Lord, 2003/12/21