From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8EE8413838B for ; Sun, 14 Sep 2014 13:55:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 9A762E0850; Sun, 14 Sep 2014 13:55:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CB06FE07BA for ; Sun, 14 Sep 2014 13:55:26 +0000 (UTC) Received: from 127.0.0.1 (unknown [176.31.59.244]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: hasufell) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 70C6A33F692 for ; Sun, 14 Sep 2014 13:55:23 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <54159E45.4030005@gentoo.org> Date: Sun, 14 Sep 2014 13:55:17 +0000 From: hasufell 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] My masterplan for git migration (+ looking for infra to test it) References: <20140914140344.6c6b99e5@pomiot.lan> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: ed9a6e0f-6752-428b-80a3-5f5f8cd131e6 X-Archives-Hash: 8175422ea8fc3fabf1a0170b949575b7 Davide Pesavento: >> Main developer repo >> ------------------- >> >> I was able to create a start git repository that takes around 66M >> as a git pack (this is how much you will have to fetch to start working >> with it). The repository is stripped clean of history and ChangeLogs, >> and has thin Manifests only. >> >> This means we don't have to wait till someone figures out the perfect >> way of converting the old CVS repository. You don't need that history >> most of the time, and you can play with CVS to get it if you really do. > > +1 > +1 >> In any case, we would likely strip the history anyway to get a small >> repo to work with. >> >> I have prepared a basic git update hook that keeps master clean >> and attached it to the bug [1]. It enforces basic policies, prevents >> forced updates and checks GPG signatures on left-most history line. It >> can also be extended to do more extensive tree checks. > > Are we going to disallow merge commits and ask devs to rebase local > changes in order to keep the history "clean"? > I'd say it doesn't make sense to create merge commits for conflicts that arise by someone having pushed earlier than you. Merge commits should only be there if they give useful information. Also... if you merge from a _user_ who is untrusted and allow a fast-forward merge, then the signature verification fails. That means for such pull requests you either have to use "git am" or "git merge --no-ff".