RE: [Haskell] fptools mirror in darcs ready for testing
On 07 December 2005 13:06, John Goerzen wrote:
On Wed, Dec 07, 2005 at 11:02:29AM +0000, Duncan Coutts wrote:
Also please note that these repos are READ ONLY for now. Nobody will be accepting darcs patches until Simon (or someone) gives the word.
When that does happen, it'd be great if the repos specified a default 'darcs send' email address so that people do not have to guess where to send their patches.
Yes, they will. Simon is thinking of having that be the appropriate cvs-*@haskell.org list. Right now, this isn't happening because there is no good place to send them.
I think the cvs-* lists are fine.
Speaking of which: how long do we want to keep this interim arrangement before switching to darcs completely?
I'm not sure yet! So far I haven't used it in anger enough, though as Duncan points out it's hard to really use it until we can commit darcs changes using darcs. Certainly performance of the --partial tree seems good enough, though I don't like that I can't see the history for individual files. I can't get browsing to work using Trac: with the full darcs repository it takes too long to do anything (like 10 seconds to bring up a directory), and with the --partial one it can't browse propely, presumably because there isn't per-file history. Cheers, Simon
On Thu, Dec 08, 2005 at 11:20:43AM -0000, Simon Marlow wrote:
Certainly performance of the --partial tree seems good enough, though I don't like that I can't see the history for individual files. I can't
Just to clarify, that limitation exists only when using --partial. One thing we could do is put a tar.bz2 up periodically that contains a full copy of the full history, which should be useful for core ghc hackers such as yourself. It should be faster than downloading the 20,000 patches individually. OTOH, the pain of a get without --partial only has to be endured once per person, and there are probably very few people that care about the full history of things dating back before their own involvement. (You'll have the full history, on a per-file basis, of things starting from the date of the last snapshot and moving forward when using --partial.) And then there are also advantages to consider: with CVS, you can't get history of things *at all* unless you have a live Internet connection, and even then it doesn't preserve things such as renames. With Darcs, once you have a local repo, you can look at changelogs all you want without ever having to hit the network.
get browsing to work using Trac: with the full darcs repository it takes
I have never worked much with these web front-ends. My understanding is that Trac is probably not the most efficient front-end to darcs, as it tries to put things in a more svn-like model. I wonder if one of the other frontends might be a better performer? (But this is a question more for a darcs list, I guess.) -- John
Am Donnerstag, 8. Dezember 2005 16:56 schrieb John Goerzen:
[...]
I have never worked much with these web front-ends. My understanding is that Trac is probably not the most efficient front-end to darcs, as it tries to put things in a more svn-like model. I wonder if one of the other frontends might be a better performer?
If one of you knows a web frontend which provides similar features as Trac does (and maybe more) but is more darcs-friendly, please tell me. (By the way, I think there is also a bit of work under way to make Tracs work (better) with other systems than Subversion.)
[...]
-- John
Best wishes, Wolfgang
participants (3)
-
John Goerzen -
Simon Marlow -
Wolfgang Jeltsch