openoffice-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Michael Stahl <>
Subject Re: (was: Building a single Hg repository)
Date Sat, 02 Jul 2011 16:45:03 GMT
On 01.07.2011 18:47, Herbert Duerr wrote:
> On 01.07.2011 13:42, Greg Stein wrote:
>> [...] Please look at
>> tools/dev/ Each of these CWS repositories (on Mac OS)
>> are consuming 600 Mb *minimum*. I've fetched a dozen, and a couple are
>> over 2 Gb each, and another over 1 Gb. And this is with the clone/pull
>> technique.
> Because of the disk space demands I think an approach with one
> repository with one branch per CWS would be better for the initial
> import. In hg there are more opportunities for this approach (using
> NamedBranched, UnnamedBranches, MultipleHeads, LocalBranches or
> Bookmarks) than I as git-fan would care to know. Please see the attached
> file where I hacked together a script that imports the CWSs into one
> repository with multiple bookmarks.

of course, mirroring all the separate repos is only an intermediate 
step, with the goal that constructing the single repo doesn't need to go 
over the slow net.

>> I don't have enough space on my laptop to do a complete trial run. I'm
>> hoping that somebody can figure out how to reduce the disk footprint,
>> or determine that we just have to suck it up. And it would be nice to
>> understand what that target size will be, for all 250 CWS
>> repositories.
> As Michael mentioned it's much less than the 250, as only about 15
> CWSses (see for details) are marked as fully tested
> and but not-yet integrated.
>  From these the ones targeted at the stabilization branch (calc67,
> calc68, ooo34gsl01, ooo34gsl02, writerfilter10, native373, jl167) are
> more important than the ones targeted for trunk (sb140, sb143, hsqldb19,
> hr77, ause131, sd2gbuild).
> There are a few more very good CWSses which were not yet officially
> approved in the old OOo system. E.g. CWS aw080 Armin mentioned. If Armin
> can confirm that this CWS is ready we should pull it in too.
> Once we have a better picture of what is ready or not cws-list.txt needs
> to be updated.

i think the goal is to migrate all open CWSes, because perhaps there's 
still something useful in there, and we don't have time to investigate 
every CWS now.

>> We have a script. It is time to make it work.
> Please see the attached file. I'm afraid to check it in as the related
> is not yet updated accordingly and also because I'm more of
> a HG victim than a HG power-user ;-)
> Please note that you either have to use HG>=1.8 or enable its bookmark
> extension before you run the attached script.

i've not used bookmarks or anything like that either, but it looks like 
it could work, except i think we may need to prevent it from creating 
wrong bookmarks in case no changes are to be pulled (it seems in this 
case, the hg bookmark -r tip would create a bookmark $cws which points 
at the previously pulled cws, instead of doing nothing; "tip" is always 
the head that was pulled last into the repo).

just tried it out, and it took 80 minutes to produce a 2.6 GB repo with 
indeed a lot of bookmarks are duplicated, as described above.

tweaked it a bit, see attachment.


"Simply, I'd say that porting [Linux] is impossible."
  -- Linus Torvalds (26. 08. 1991)

View raw message