A web interface to git
Posted Apr 28, 2005 15:23 UTC (Thu)
by thompsot (guest, #12368)
[Link] (2 responses)
Posted Apr 29, 2005 18:39 UTC (Fri)
by proski (subscriber, #104)
[Link] (1 responses)
Remember that the complete history of Linux (or at least the full set of revisions that existed in BitKeeper) has not been imported into the git repository, and I doubt that git would be able to handle it in its present form.
Posted Apr 29, 2005 19:19 UTC (Fri)
by dlang (guest, #313)
[Link]
one of the big things about git is that each snapshot is completely independant of the prior ones, this means that you don't have to have (or pull) older versions if you don't want to.
there have been people who have pulled the entire kernel history into git (it took 3 - 3.6G of disk for the result IIRC), so git can handle the full history.
Linus has said that at this point he really doesn't care about the older stuff (as it is available through other means) and so he doesn't intend to fully populate his repository with all the older stuff. personally I expect this to change over time, but unless people really need all of that history in git and post good reasons to back the request up it's unlikly to happen soon.
Posted Apr 28, 2005 15:23 UTC (Thu)
by StevenCole (guest, #3068)
[Link]
The big thanks must go to the developers. Kay Sievers and Christian Gierke are listed in the code for gitweb.cgi.
This looks great!
Posted Apr 28, 2005 15:43 UTC (Thu)
by Seegras (guest, #20463)
[Link] (5 responses)
Posted Apr 28, 2005 20:30 UTC (Thu)
by spot (guest, #15640)
[Link] (4 responses)
Posted May 5, 2005 9:31 UTC (Thu)
by nix (subscriber, #2304)
[Link] (3 responses)
(Besides, nobody uses Linux on SPARC anymore, I hope. UltraSPARC, sure...)
Posted May 5, 2005 16:36 UTC (Thu)
by bferrell (subscriber, #624)
[Link] (2 responses)
Posted May 7, 2005 2:35 UTC (Sat)
by clump (subscriber, #27801)
[Link] (1 responses)
Posted May 13, 2005 14:20 UTC (Fri)
by nix (subscriber, #2304)
[Link]
Posted Apr 28, 2005 20:02 UTC (Thu)
by macemoneta (guest, #2717)
[Link]
Posted Apr 29, 2005 6:44 UTC (Fri)
by ctg (guest, #3459)
[Link]
Posted Apr 29, 2005 9:44 UTC (Fri)
by nhoxanh (guest, #17931)
[Link] (3 responses)
Posted Apr 29, 2005 13:12 UTC (Fri)
by corbet (editor, #1)
[Link] (1 responses)
Posted Apr 29, 2005 22:32 UTC (Fri)
by iabervon (subscriber, #722)
[Link]
Posted Apr 29, 2005 18:00 UTC (Fri)
by bos (guest, #6154)
[Link]
In effect, Andrew's "tree" is what he publishes as the -mm kernel patch sets. That's really what he works in terms of - piles of patches.
It seems that unless the kernel developers hit a major snag in git's capabilities, we're looking at the next defacto standard in it's early stages.A web interface to git
The obvious snag is the network throughput. I think we are more likely to see something with the backend of Mercurial and multiple frontends.
Or we are going to see a "git server" that would eliminate the need to download the whole repository (but it would be a step back to the client-server model of CVS and Subversion). Or git will be changed to pull old revisions on demand only.
Standard?
there is already work being done on a git-aware server so this will be done sooner rather then later, but it will not take things back to the CVS central server model becouse you are not depending strictly on one server and only being able to pull from that server.Standard?
Just to clarify, the thanks to me were for giving Jon a heads up about the recent announcement.
A web interface to git
Linus tree? Naah, that one will come out as official kernel when its ready (tm). The interesting things are David Millers Sparc fixes of course ;). A web interface to git
Yes, but only for all 7 of us Linux/SPARC users. ;)A web interface to git
8, please. :)A web interface to git
9 and I have two of 'em!A web interface to git
Ooh, let me be number 10. *And* I actually use SPARC/32. I would like some UltraSparc 64-bit but alas... I currently have none. Linux on SPARC is great, and many thanks to all that make it happen.A web interface to git
I'm surprised Linux on SPARC32 still works, as it hasn't had an active maintainer since the 2.2 days.A web interface to git
There's also an alternative interface at:A web interface to git
So, after only a week or two since the "disaster".. I can see signs of Now this is _far_ better than the bkbits web site
things being better than they were before... (which, as a believer in the
FOSS development paradigm, I fully expected).
The SCM is dead! Long live the SCM!!
anybody knows where Andrew's tree is?Andrew Morton's git?
He never had a BK tree, and I doubt he'll have a git tree. The way he operates requires a different sort of tool.
Andrew Morton's git?
He seems to be interested in trying out git, at least. He was asking on the git mailing list how to use git for his workflow, and Linus had some suggestions.Andrew Morton's git?
Andrew used to use a set of patch management scripts that he wrote himself. These turned into (or inspired, I can't remember) quilt. I don't recall whether he uses quilt at the moment.Andrew Morton's git?