Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-project] Portage repo usage survey and change evaluation

[Gordon Pettey <petteyg359@gmail.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1077 bytes --]

On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 1:20 AM, Patrick Lauer <patrick@gentoo.org> wrote:

> It is almost, but not completely unlike it. A simple ChangeLog is a lot
> easier ...
>
>
> (Why are people now trying to add middleware layers to indirect the
> problem to become invisible in a huge machinery? This is wonderfully
> insane ...)


Exactly... The SCM is a lot easier, and you avoid any middleware layers and
indirection :)

Regarding all the previous size arguments: my system doesn't agree. A
recent rsync sync gave me an 856 MB directory (of which 223 MB is those
precious ChangeLog and ChangeLog-2015 files). A checkout from git, plus
news, glsa, etc. (using hasufell's convenient portage-gentoo-git-config on
GitHub) is only 782M, and I can get more detailed change information than
those ChangeLog* files could ever give. Then there's the option of putting
it on btrfs with compression if I still want the working tree smaller. You
can argue about squashfs reducing the size, but you can do that with a tree
from git just like you could with a tree from rsync, so it's irrelevant.

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1430 bytes --]