Mike Frysinger <vap...@gentoo.org> writes: > On 14 Jan 2016 00:59, Mathieu Lirzin wrote: >> However in the case of GNU packages which don't use C, It is a bit >> overkill to clone a full repository only for some maintenance scripts >> and a robust bootstrap script which fetches .po files. >> [....] >> What do people think? > > is it really that big of a problem to fetch 10MiB of data ? > $ git clone --depth=1 git://git.sv.gnu.org/gnulib.git > Cloning into 'gnulib'... > remote: Counting objects: 9369, done. > remote: Compressing objects: 100% (8310/8310), done. > remote: Total 9369 (delta 5065), reused 2198 (delta 1038) > Receiving objects: 100% (9369/9369), 7.56 MiB | 1.94 MiB/s, done. > Resolving deltas: 100% (5065/5065), done. > Checking connectivity... done. > $ cd gnulib > $ du -s -h .git > 8.8M .git > $ du -s -h . > 69M
I didn't know about the --depth option. Thanks for making me learn something. :) I have just realized that using a Git sub-module for Gnulib is much more heavy weight than letting bootstrap automatically clone the latest version of Gnulib with '--depth=2'. My experience with Gnulib was more like that: --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8--- ./bootstrap: getting gnulib files... Submodule 'gnulib' (git://git.sv.gnu.org/gnulib.git) registered for path 'gnulib' Cloning into 'gnulib'... remote: Counting objects: 166232, done. remote: Compressing objects: 100% (24259/24259), done. remote: Total 166232 (delta 141984), reused 166129 (delta 141915) Receiving objects: 100% (166232/166232), 31.47 MiB | 767.00 KiB/s, done. Resolving deltas: 100% (141984/141984), done. Checking connectivity... done. Submodule path '.gnulib': checked out '9a7c87c5a5ccb1ab2d5b67bc9b3b8d7ae0fa4377' --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8--- So I agree with you that the current behavior (without sub-modules) is adapted for the use case I have described. -- Mathieu Lirzin
