On Fri, Aug 31, 2018 at 11:48 AM Eric Raymond wrote:
> I did experiment with that. Unfortunately, the source code it produced
when I ran it on my stuff was an unmaintainable mess.
> Possibly correct, I don't know - but I couldn't trust it because I can't
read it.
Yup, not surprising considering
On Friday, August 31, 2018 at 4:30:08 AM UTC-4, Jan Mercl wrote:
>
> In case you haven't heard it before, Google was thinking on the same lines
> and released Grumpy last year:
> https://opensource.googleblog.com/2017/01/grumpy-go-running-python.html.
> I never used the tool and it may possibl
On Fri, Aug 31, 2018 at 10:36 AM Jan Mercl <0xj...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 31, 2018 at 10:29 AM Jan Mercl <0xj...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > https://opensource.googleblog.com/2017/01/grumpy-go-running-python.html
> .
>
> The linked above blog post links to http://grump.io/ but it seems to be
On Fri, Aug 31, 2018 at 10:29 AM Jan Mercl <0xj...@gmail.com> wrote:
> https://opensource.googleblog.com/2017/01/grumpy-go-running-python.html.
The linked above blog post links to http://grump.io/ but it seems to be a
dead link for me ATM. The project repository is here:
https://github.com/google
On Fri, Aug 31, 2018 at 5:43 AM Eric Raymond wrote:
> I translated an auxiliary tool called repocutter (it slices and dices
Subversion dump streams) as a warm-up. This leads me to believe I can
expect about a 40x speedup.
> That's worth playing for, even before I do things like exploiting
concurr
There's been enough interest here in the technical questions I've been
raising recently that a bit of a backgrounder seems in order.
Back in 2010 I noticed that git's fast-import stream format opened up some
possibilities its designers probably hadn't anticipated. Their original
motivation was
