From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1QS6hF-0006q7-NP for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Thu, 02 Jun 2011 12:08:23 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 544ED1C11B for ; Thu, 2 Jun 2011 12:08:17 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1CF5A1C0B8 for ; Thu, 2 Jun 2011 11:16:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.1.105] (p4FC20AED.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [79.194.10.237]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: patrick) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 45FB81B4038 for ; Thu, 2 Jun 2011 11:16:09 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <4DE771E8.1040005@gentoo.org> Date: Thu, 02 Jun 2011 13:20:08 +0200 From: Patrick Lauer User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.2.17) Gecko/20110525 Lightning/1.0b3pre Thunderbird/3.1.10 Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: RFC: better policy for ChageLogs References: <4DD24EBE.5060002@gentoo.org> <201106011739.45691.dilfridge@gentoo.org> <201106011824.06028.dilfridge@gentoo.org> <4DE6CB57.5080709@gentoo.org> <1306991344.4416.37.camel@tablet> <4DE73E86.30804@gentoo.org> In-Reply-To: <4DE73E86.30804@gentoo.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: X-Archives-Hash: 23e07f23862bd4eab1dcf4efde46c472 On 06/02/11 09:40, Eray Aslan wrote: >> Is git faster then rsync? I've never done any checks but it'll be >> surprising if it will. > > Git usually is faster - except the initial clone. Basically, rsync > protocol scales with the project size not with change size. We're discussing performance of something that takes less than a minute. I see times of ~30-45 seconds for emerge --sync vs. ~30 seconds for git pull on the kde overlay. And then portage takes so much longer to calculate deps anyway ... why are we discussing the performance of the fastest operation? ;) > And lastly, while I don't really care either way, I think at least some > of the push back is the result of unfamiliarity with git. And my > impression is that unless a dev with enough political capital spearheads > the move, this issue will continue to come up for a long time yet. > More the complexity of git making simple things an hour-long oddysey through IRC, trying to find someone who has a clue how to get the HEAD back ... it's a complex thing that usually gets in the way when I use more than add, commit and push (and even push is aargh nooo why so complimacated?!) But I guess people prefer having to write wrapper scripts around wrappers to get things done, so I'll just stay out of the way and reserve the right to point and laugh when funny misbehaviour happens. -- Patrick Lauer http://service.gentooexperimental.org Gentoo Council Member and Evangelist Part of Gentoo Benchmarks, Forensics, PostgreSQL, KDE herds