On Friday 09 September 2005 13:04, Ian Pratt wrote:
> > Hi, sorry if I've missed the explanation somewhere, but
> > what's the motivation for keeping sparse trees for the OSs
> > instead of full trees?
> >
> > For PPC work, we've been using a full hg Linux tree, and it's
> > made things very convenient to pull, merge, and diff work
> > with upstream. In fact I think every Linux developer out
> > there has multiple trees, even though they probably aren't
> > modifying more than a dozen for any particular project. Any
> > reason we don't do this with Xen development?
>
> The plan is to move to a sperate Linux hg tree as part of preparing code
> for mergeing.
Ah, great!
> The motivation for the sparse tree is that it massively reduces the size
> of the repo, and serves to highlight the files we've modified.
Well, I think source control systems do an ok job of showing files you've
modified. :) As for the repository size, users will have to download a full
Linux tree anyways...
Given the convenience of having a separate tree, and since the x86 trees will
be separate soon(ish), I guess we will avoid a new sparse tree for PPC work.
--
Hollis Blanchard
IBM Linux Technology Center
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
|
Home