[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Gnu-arch-users] archive order?
From: |
Tom Lord |
Subject: |
Re: [Gnu-arch-users] archive order? |
Date: |
Sat, 23 Aug 2003 11:51:31 -0700 (PDT) |
> From: Maksim Lin <address@hidden>
> From my understanding, the archive keeps the base "prisitine" source
> version and then just accumalates changesets as tgz files and if I do a
> get of the latest 'head' revision, it will fetch the base source then
> apply all the patches it has over the top to get me the latest revsion
> in my working dir.
That's true only if:
(a) you don't have a revision library for this source
(b) the archive maintainer hasn't archive-cached any revisions
> My question is: since most of the time you actually want the latest
> revision and then sometime (less often) you want to grab some older
> historical revision, why doesn't the archive actually keep an up to date
> (ie latest revsion) copy of the src and then just apply the changesets
> "backwards" to get older revisions?
> Does that make sense or do I have things backwards?
It makes sense. Archive-caching and revision libraries give
essentially the same effect as the optimization your asking about.
The "minimalist archive" (just the bases, tags, and changesets) you
could think of as just a transaction log -- ancillary structures like
archive caching and rev-libs give you a flexible array of options for
performance tuning after that.
-t
[Gnu-arch-users] Re: archive order?, Stig Brautaset, 2003/08/23