Date: Sat, 3 Apr 2021 01:37:41 +0200 From: Martin Matuska <mm@FreeBSD.org> To: Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com>, Ed Maste <emaste@freebsd.org> Cc: freebsd-git <freebsd-git@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: OpenZFS branch tracking policy Message-ID: <41924e9d-9d61-6646-6c8f-e4458f94296e@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <CANCZdfoPm0tfDpBTU8ORy-_Oa-tkiNX0_MeAdJn0T5ZJdQe6MQ@mail.gmail.com> References: <21c7313e-315c-ec48-9437-e0a3d4ec14d2@FreeBSD.org> <CANCZdfopOxm-HTYkVPHkEweHw-F%2BA9mk3Vv26x4t3MEAVEd2gQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAPyFy2DS=nsE3-JQdqQC797xQhAiBACkuyA%2BcxkcRY0yeB_6=w@mail.gmail.com> <CANCZdfoPm0tfDpBTU8ORy-_Oa-tkiNX0_MeAdJn0T5ZJdQe6MQ@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hi Warner and Ed, 2.1-release has already been branched. The stable branch policy in=20 OpenZFS is somewhat strange, they make a staging branch for each=20 patchlevel release, but the commits are continuous. To have some idea how big the repo history is: $ git rev-list master --count 6662 $ git rev-list zfs-2.1-release --count 6650 master and zfs-2.1-release have 6650 common commits at the=C2=A0 moment $ git log master | wc -l 129868 (linecount - 4 * revcount) / revcount =3D linecount / revcount - 4 =3D=20 15,4938 comment lines per commit on average Initial commit was made in Feb 26, 2008. Yearly commit counts: $ git log master | grep -c -E '^Date:.* 2020 -[0-9]+$' 666 $ git log master | grep -c -E '^Date:.* 2019 -[0-9]+$' 535 $git log master | grep -c -E '^Date:.* 2018 -[0-9]+$' 428 Martin On 2. 4. 2021 20:15, Warner Losh wrote: > > > On Fri, Apr 2, 2021 at 11:56 AM Ed Maste <emaste@freebsd.org=20 > <mailto:emaste@freebsd.org>> wrote: > > On Fri, 2 Apr 2021 at 11:50, Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com > <mailto:imp@bsdimp.com>> wrote: > > > > We'd always hoped that we'd be able to do subtree merges from > upstreams > > that use git into FreeBSD. The big worry, though, was that this > would > > needless bloat the repo with a lot of history. We don't want, > for example, > > all of LLVM's history in the tree. We'd always anticipated that > there'd be > > some things we'd just accept the history for, since it is similar= in > > character to the vendor branches (though of course a bit more). > > Note that if we do want to avoid bringing in the full history `git > subtree merge` supports a `--squash` option. This brings in the set= of > upstream changes as a single commit, without bringing along the > associated history. We will need to do more experimentation to conf= irm > that the full process, including bootstrapping, will work as we wan= t. > Assuming this all works it should allow us to forgo the use of a > FreeBSD-specific vendor branch in src. > > We've discussed mirroring any such 3rd-party source in some > FreeBSD-controlled repository. This would allow the project to reta= in > a full copy of the history, but avoid bloating src with it. > > I agree with Warner that we may want a different policy (full histo= ry > or snapshots) for different contrib sources. > > > Good points Ed. I'd forgotten about --squash. > > Martin, what's your timeline for wanting to implement these things?=20 > I'm unfamiliar with the OpenZFS schedules. > > Warner
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?41924e9d-9d61-6646-6c8f-e4458f94296e>