Joel Rees <joel.r...@gmail.com> writes: > On Sun, Sep 14, 2014 at 10:43 PM, lee <l...@yun.yagibdah.de> wrote: >> Joel Rees <joel.r...@gmail.com> writes: >> >>> 2014/09/14 6:55 "lee" <lee@ <l...@yun.yagibdah.de>yun.yagibdah.de >>> <l...@yun.yagibdah.de>>: >>>> >>>> Joel Rees <joel.rees <joel.r...@gmail.com>@ <joel.r...@gmail.com>gmail.com >>> <joel.r...@gmail.com>> writes: >>> >>> I can't think of any reason it would be dependent on https connectivity. >>> Any way you can reach the repository should allow scripted query, thus >>> checking by a cron job. >> >> Oh I don't think it's limited; the problem is to figure out how to use >> other protocols like git to get the information. > > Hmm. So. When you do a > > git status > > on the command line, with the current working directory at the > appropriate place in the repostory, you have taken the trouble to > specify your repository as something like > > http://git.code.sf.net/p/asm68c/code > > instead of > > git://git.code.sf.net/p/asm68c/code > > ?
In one case, I cloned it; in another, I don't know anymore what exactly I did. > I think git is the usual/default protocol when you clone a repository. I don't know --- look at an arbitrary repo on github, and you'll find yourself presented with an http URL to clone it. Look at the emacs git-repo, and you're presented a git URL to clone it. Whether that means that all repos are accessible through http _and_ git, I don't know. > Or do you mean that you are using a web browser to browse and observe > the repository? Yes and no. With one of the repos, it's convenient to use a web browser to look at the change log because it's presented on the web site. To figure out if there have been changes, I'd have to look at the web site. In the other case, I'm not looking at a web site. In any of the cases, I'm *not* being informed about new commits. I need to look for them one way or another, and I'd rather get an email that informs me automatically. > If so,suddenly your questions make sense, sort of. > Except I then want to know why you want to access the repository, if > you aren't doing things that involve the whole tree, or perhaps > sub-sections of the tree. On of the repos is an upstream repo to my fork, so I pull from it from time to time. The other one is the emacs repo, and I haven't made a fork of it. I just pull from it from time to time to keep my emacs version up to date --- and I have made a modification to hilock.el of which I hope might be integrated plus a minor modification to one of the files written in C. That can make things a bit more complicated than simply pulling every now and then. All of this may involve the whole tree or not, depending on what has changed. What does it matter? >> With polling, these 50k users each connecting three times a day makes >> 150k connections to the git server. The git server would have to be >> able to completely handle each connection within 0.576 seconds, and it >> might become unreachable during spikes. > > Well, yeah, that's one of the reasons the hooks have been provided. > But most repositories don't have that kind of traffic. Probably not --- we'd have to ask the developers of git why such an important feature is missing. > And you should also consider that, with git, the assumption is that > everyone is mostly working on their own clone of the repository, > sometimes doing diffs and so-forth with other developers' > repositories, and only occasionally going to a central repository. How would that work, or why would they make a copy at some point in time, work totally isolated on that for a year or for many years and only then look at a central repo eventually? That doesn't make any sense to me. Git is supposed to be a tool for collaboration, isn't it? People working together on something would probably have a hard time to collaborate through isolating themselves by not keeping track of a central repo or by not keeping track of everyone elses repo. Once someone pushes to the central repo (or their own), everyone else may want to have the latest version and thus needs to pull --- or they decide to wait when looking at the change log. How does everyone get informed about new commits (when a hook that sends out an email isn't used)? Everyone would have to track the centralised repo, or various repos, by manually using a web browser or some other manual means to see what's going on. It's stupid when you have to do that. -- Knowledge is volatile and fluid. Software is power. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/871tr8ptzh....@yun.yagibdah.de
