From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stephen Berman Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: need help adjusting workflow to git (or vice versa) Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2014 22:19:06 +0100 Message-ID: <87fvdmu7cl.fsf@rosalinde.fritz.box> References: <87zjbvt8o3.fsf@rosalinde.fritz.box> <5464DC5F.8070607@gmx.at> <87oasaubfc.fsf@rosalinde.fritz.box> <54651045.6080901@cs.ucla.edu> <87k32yu8yh.fsf@rosalinde.fritz.box> <54651B70.2080302@cs.ucla.edu> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1415913582 26766 80.91.229.3 (13 Nov 2014 21:19:42 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2014 21:19:42 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Kelvin White , Harald Hanche-Olsen , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Paul Eggert Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Nov 13 22:19:34 2014 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Xp1ng-0005WP-Af for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 13 Nov 2014 22:19:32 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:33936 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Xp1nf-0003xQ-L4 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 13 Nov 2014 16:19:31 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:37521) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Xp1nX-0003x9-Cu for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 13 Nov 2014 16:19:28 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Xp1nS-0005G4-GW for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 13 Nov 2014 16:19:23 -0500 Original-Received: from mout.gmx.net ([212.227.17.21]:50901) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Xp1nK-0005FE-Ba; Thu, 13 Nov 2014 16:19:10 -0500 Original-Received: from rosalinde.fritz.box ([89.245.82.172]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx101) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0LezI3-1YLL190Dtv-00qm3S; Thu, 13 Nov 2014 22:19:08 +0100 In-Reply-To: <54651B70.2080302@cs.ucla.edu> (Paul Eggert's message of "Thu, 13 Nov 2014 12:58:24 -0800") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.0.50 (gnu/linux) X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:T7wL7y1Dv+Wmb0FTV9Wklz1bWV5DBnhzhOzTkMk8mAoKcuz7rHd H6Kpi5iIiiLWrK1NFp9OdwfryvkBNV2za25h+HBSqOrv39VgUGzcCZeOIt4Wsj9tfF6nJO+ zLuwxoEAdftwbM2UG4cHMOins6WWO1lTMGmGNNNE/OOTTOM5sNz4X9km5IvxOduLf9WAy/d NP30VeaIby5WVpk3/JnKw== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1; X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 212.227.17.21 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:177011 Archived-At: On Thu, 13 Nov 2014 12:58:24 -0800 Paul Eggert wrote: > On 11/13/2014 12:44 PM, Stephen Berman wrote: >> That's what Martin referred to, isn't it? It takes considerably longer on my >> older and feebler hardware, also compared with `bzr update' and `bzr pull >> --overwrite' in a shared repository. > > By "shared repository" do you mean you have just one copy of the working > files? I thought you had multiple copies, one for each branch. That's what I > do, as it helps 'make' go faster. I also have copies of the working files for each bzr branch, but just one copy of the history; but it appears I had a wrong idea of what cloning does... >> And the size is also not insignificant, if it means having a copy of the >> entire Emacs repository for each build (~540M). > > No, the repository is shared: > > $ time git clone master tmp > Cloning into 'tmp'... > done. > > real 0m1.314s > user 0m0.997s > sys 0m0.280s > $ du -s master/.git tmp/.git > 205500 master/.git > 768 tmp/.git Ok, this is not what I had thought, but I'm glad I was mistaken. On Thu, 13 Nov 2014 21:58:27 +0100 (CET) Harald Hanche-Olsen wrote: > [Stephen Berman (2014-11-13 20:44:22 UTC)] > >> That's what Martin referred to, isn't it? It takes considerably longer >> on my older and feebler hardware, also compared with `bzr update' and >> `bzr pull --overwrite' in a shared repository. And the size is also not >> insignificant, if it means having a copy of the entire Emacs repository >> for each build (~540M). > > You might have a look at the options --local and --shallow to git > clone. The idea would be to have one full clone that pulls from > savannah, then any number of local clones pulling from from that one. > > After running git clone --local emacs emacs2 > I get this: > > ; du -sh emacs/.git emacs2/.git > 199M emacs/.git > 392K emacs2/.git > > The clone operation was pretty fast, too. 7 seconds on an SSD. Thanks, that's information I was missing, and seems to be just what I want. On Thu, 13 Nov 2014 15:53:24 -0500 Kelvin White wrote: > On Nov 13, 2014 2:51 PM, "Stephen Berman" wrote: >> >> On Thu, 13 Nov 2014 10:49:05 -0500 Kelvin White wrote: >> [...] >> > >> > The uncommitted changes will not be included unless you add them and >> > commit them. >> >> But they are included in the build (I confirmed this by building from my >> build branch, not from task branch (i.e., with my build branch currently >> checked out), and that's what I want to avoid. > > Before checking out your build branch, either commit your changes, or stash > them. This will keep the changes in the build branch and not carry them over > into whatever branch you check out first. Thanks, I didn't know about stashing either, and it seems to be close to what I wanted. Thanks to all of you for the feedback, it's been edifying. Steve Berman