And of course the attachment didn't come through, please see http://people.mozilla.org/~jst/filecounts.jpg
On 5/31/2013 1:14 PM, Johnny Stenback wrote: > On 5/31/2013 12:32 AM, Mike Hommey wrote: > [...] >>> Option 1 is where I personally think it's worth investing effort. It >>> means we'd need to set up an atomic bidirectional bridge between hg and >>> git (which I'm told is doable, and there are even commercial solutions >>> for this out there that may solve this for us). Assuming we solve the >>> bridge problem one way or another, it would give us all the benefits >>> listed above, plus developer tool choice, and we could roll this out >>> incrementally w/o the need to change all of our infrastructure at once. >>> I.e. our roll out could look something like this: >>> >>> 1. create a read only, official mozilla-central git mirror >>> 2. add support for pushing to try with git and see the results in tbpl >>> 3. update tbpl to show git revisions in addition to hg revisions >>> 4. move to project branches, then inbound, then m-c, release branches, etc >> >> Another way to look at this would be to make the git repository the >> real central source, and keep the mercurial branches as clones of it, >> with hg-git (and hg-git supports pushing to git, too). >> >> This would likely make it easier to support pushing to both, although >> we'd need to ensure nobody pushes octopus merges in the git repo. > > Yup, could be, and IMO the main point is that we'd have a lot of > flexibility here. > >>> Option 2 is where this discussion started (in the Tuesday meeting a few >>> weeks ago, >>> https://wiki.mozilla.org/Platform/2013-05-07#Should_we_switch_from_hg_to_git.3F). >>> Since then I've had a number of conversations and have been convinced >>> that a wholesale change is the less attractive option. The cost of a >>> wholesale change will be *huge* on the infrastructure end, to a point >>> where we need to question whether the benefits are worth the cost. I >>> have also spoken with other large engineering orgs about git performance >>> limitations, one of which is doing the opposite switch, going from git >>> to hg. >> >> I bet this is facebook. Their usecase includes millions of changesets >> with millions of files (iirc, according to posts i've seen on the git >> list). > > I've promised not to mention names here, so I won't confirm nor deny... > but the folks I've been talking to mostly have a repo that's a good bit > less than a single order of magnitude larger than m-c, so a couple of > hundred k files, not millions. And given the file count trend in m-c > (see attached image for an approximation), that doesn't make me feel too > good about a wholesale switch given the work involved in doing so. > >> Mike >> > > > > _______________________________________________ > dev-platform mailing list > dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org > https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform > -- jst _______________________________________________ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
