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 1SaV8n-00031m-Rz for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Fri, 01 Jun 2012 16:55:58 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id E305BE0663; Fri, 1 Jun 2012 16:55:42 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-we0-f181.google.com (mail-we0-f181.google.com [74.125.82.181]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 36582E0630 for ; Fri, 1 Jun 2012 16:55:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: by werj55 with SMTP id j55so1702981wer.40 for ; Fri, 01 Jun 2012 09:55:01 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=tLP/oPSuf4NdPDm+zw6F/fSZX8W7PrGEB4LdBmLufYo=; b=hnKU4ca9hr3+M+SJo1jtW7ooZdRs06v+X4zGHO/6+dg/rc7/aum/xUBx2QIRzd6im4 6z7OuxbktKV1YYjcc6tXLUtJt3thcWHfqRa4BJfBRd/GEuHLvy4B5+iKQpcI2Gi6aKQk 6uqKPwNdpmD/WmLEhlHCnJ7zMJ8x8xFKJUoxKbzC+k7M0aIl+xfW+TSsGgL1h/C1rH+/ /khnC/DJLUliJXK8cSV6nPP2GTIrFh3RwLU18UQbg04tEuba4Pj/MrqqWYxiSIMpcTiZ 18dRGIsn44CWTGTS2dnzSfpLU8wWpWgsARgEgI0lkWnuklycn4ACbB+L+Nq5TkPVHQ17 zYBg== 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 Received: by 10.216.215.17 with SMTP id d17mr2363234wep.166.1338569701085; Fri, 01 Jun 2012 09:55:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.194.60.167 with HTTP; Fri, 1 Jun 2012 09:55:01 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <20120531195450.GA24805@linux1> <20120531205714.GA25021@linux1> <20120601154548.GA10637@linux1> Date: Sat, 2 Jun 2012 04:55:01 +1200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Portage Git migration - clean cut or git-cvsserver From: Kent Fredric To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Archives-Salt: d4402b48-4aaa-44c0-ad85-e6ac6535b447 X-Archives-Hash: 5538efb1d964ac791e03423b4f6c0fa8 On 2 June 2012 04:33, Robin H. Johnson wrote: > On Fri, Jun 01, 2012 at 10:45:48AM -0500, William Hubbs wrote: >> Overlays are completely separate repositories. There is nothing stopping >> an overlay from using git right now even if the main tree isn't using >> git. They just work in their git repositories until they are ready to >> commit something to the main tree, then they move the changes to the >> main tree. > What about overlay repositories that elect to be a branch of the main > tree via git? > > Do we call that forbidden usage? You can't practically use any overlay foolish enough to publish these repositories for end user consumption. Its just a silly idea. There's no problem with having overlays cloned into a branch as a step towards it hitting mainline, but overlays being distributed to users as main tree branches is just a silly idea. Mostly, because end-users will still have ::gentoo via rsync, and the load of cloning a git repo of ::gentoo will be too much for the average user, doing that just to get an overlay is exhaustively execessive vs the current mechanism we have for overlays, and it comes at a penalty at being not as good as overlays in that you can't easily have >1 of them. --=20 Kent perl -e=C2=A0 "print substr( \"edrgmaM=C2=A0 SPA NOcomil.ic\\@tfrken\", \$_= * 3, 3 ) for ( 9,8,0,7,1,6,5,4,3,2 );" http://kent-fredric.fox.geek.nz