On Monday, February 22, 2016 12:20:02 PM PST Jose Fonseca wrote: > On 22/02/16 02:59, Eric Anholt wrote: > > Brian Paul <brian.e.p...@gmail.com> writes: > > > >> On Sat, Feb 20, 2016 at 2:41 PM, Jason Ekstrand <ja...@jlekstrand.net> > >> wrote: > >> > >>> > >>> On Feb 20, 2016 1:19 PM, "Rob Clark" <robdcl...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>>> > >>>> fwiw, I think a *small* number of topic branches in certain cases > >>>> makes sense.. I'm definitely in support of a TTL limit (ie. > >>>> automatically nuke topic branches with no activity in N months, or > >>>> similar..) > >>> > >>> I agree. Sometimes something big comes up that's not ready for merging > >>> such as amdgpu or our recently pushed Vulkan driver. However, those should > >>> only be temporary and removed once the work is complete. I saw a > >>> "broadwell" branch in there which is probably at least 2 years old and > >>> completely subsumed by master. We don't want to be archiving random junk > >>> in the main tree. > >>> > >>> I'd be fine with a timeout system where non-release branches get the boot > >>> after a certain amount inactivity. If you want to archive something, that's > >>> what personal git repos are for. > >>> > >> > >> I'm OK with deleting old branches too. > >> > >> I don't know much about git under the hood- would deleting old branches > >> actually delete the objects on those branches and make the database > >> smaller? If so, I'm guessing it probably wouldn't amount to much. > > > > People pulling down the repository fresh wouldn't get any objects that > > existed only in the old branches. For those of us with existing clones, > > the tracking branch would stay around until we do a git prune, and then > > the objects would stay around until git gc. > > > > There's an argument for keeping branches that aren't merged, in case > > someone wants to pick the work back up again. But then, almost all > > branches of that type are in personal repositories, anyway. > > I don't disagree, but one problem of using personal repos for > development history is that personal directories on fdo.org aren't being > backed up.
I thought that changed after the great data loss of 2009, and things are actually backed up now. I'd have to ask in #freedesktop to confirm though... --Ken
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
