Re: [PATCH] mk/git-package.mk (Re: migrate to git for emacs-current (24.0.50) ?

Greg, thanks again,

| From: Greg Troxel <[email protected]>
| Subject: Re: [PATCH] mk/git-package.mk (Re: migrate to	git	for	emacs-current	(24.0.50) ?
| Date: Wed, 09 Jun 2010 21:08:38 -0400
| Message-ID: <[email protected]>

      >   I also notice that even this flags is set, archive may get
      > fat by accumulating history on local copy of .git. I don't
      > exactly not tell the impact of this for the time being.

Greg> I don't understand what you are trying to say.  I think if one continues
Greg> to do a 'git fetch' into a repo over time, then the storage requirements
Greg> will grow.  But I think it will grow relatively slowly.

Greg> The big choice is between

Greg>    clone
Greg>    tar up into pseudo distfile
Greg>  or
Greg>    untar previous version

The proposed procedure is like:

(1) check todays tar (on local distfiles/git-package)
(2) check old tar    (the same as above)
(3a) if tar found, open tar
     and then 'git checkout -f master'
(3b) if tar not found, 'git clone'
(4) if cloned recently or tar file was the same date .. do not write
   else tar up (on local distfiles/git-package) for next time

  By this way without deleting distfiles/git-package/emacs*
stuff, 'git clone' won't be executed at all, and .git may get
fat (very slowly), I think.

 check at the stage (4) is little bit rough, it would be better
if git checkout -f master get some update or not. But above
method works OK anyhow I believe.

Thank you,
---
Makoto Fujiwara, 
Chiba, Japan, Narita Airport and Disneyland prefecture.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ThinkGeek and WIRED's GeekDad team up for the Ultimate 
GeekDad Father's Day Giveaway. ONE MASSIVE PRIZE to the 
lucky parental unit.  See the prize list and enter to win: 
http://p.sf.net/sfu/thinkgeek-promo