On Mon, 2 Nov 2015 05:50:39 +0000 "Robin H. Johnson" <robb...@gentoo.org> wrote:
> I'm replying to the top level of the thread, because I've been on > offline vacation recharging myself for a week, and this thread seems > to have degenerated into ways to avoid the issue, rather than > focusing with what's actually wrong. > > rsync-as-a-way-to-get-the-tree is NOT being deprecated, it has very > valid use cases, and places where git is not suited. > > I asked zmedico & dol-sen for TWO critical changes to egencache's > --update-changelogs code. > > 1. Control of the OUTPUT filename for the generated changelog > - the from-git generated changelog will go to 'ChangeLog.git' > 2. Control for the order ENTRY for the generated changelog > - changing to OLDEST-first, with appending the new data at the end > - this massively improves rsync performance. > > dol-sen said he was busy with the repoman rewrite, and didn't want to > introduce the change at the time, so this has been deferred for the > moment. > > Without #1, we have to rename ALL of the old changelogs, otherwise > they will be overwritten by the new ones from Git history. > > I probably should have created a bug for both of these, because I > don't know if they got tracked accurately since I asked for them in > August, and I certainly don't see the code being updated in the > repoman or master branches of the portage repo (it also still > generates a $Header$ entry, which does have an open bug as well). > > Since dol-sen and zmedico are so busy as well, somebody from this > thread with time to complain, please implement & test these changes! > It's NOT as trivial as dropping a variable into the place where it > opens the file, because there is other code later that also hardcodes > the filename. > Well, to be honest, I kinda forgot about this. (too many things on my plate) The repoman code is released and mostly stable, and starting work on stage2 of that process. So That is one thing less to worry about for the moment. Any other required repoman changes are certainly possible now. The $HEADER$ did get an initial change, but as I recall there has been no official/final decision on whether it is to be dropped completely. Plus I'm not finding that bug this morning. If it is to be dropped completely, that can be done. As I recall it was you that wanted to keep it, at least for an interim period for some other infra use in the rsync tree generation. I don't recall the exact reason. Most certainly patches are welcome. -- Brian Dolbec <dolsen>
