On Fri, Dec 04, 2015 at 12:02:56PM -0800, K. "pestophagous" Heller wrote:
> >
> > I'm thinking of going back to just not storing images in git, period.

And I pushed a commit that does just that last night...

> (some of what follows may consist of "dumb questions." i have never
> looked at the subsurface source code that interacts with git, although
> now I am feeling very curious to do so.)
> 
> it makes sense to me that disk storage is not a big concern, but
> rather that the amount of data transferred over slow phone/tablet
> connection is a concern.

Yes, very much so.

> Question: if the pictures to be transferred were small thumbnails,
> then wouldn't we solve the data-transfer problem by doing something
> like "shallow clone" when downloading the pictures to a phone? (if
> each picture is very small, then the only problem with transferring
> those small git-tracked items would be if there was a lot of history,
> right?)

So yes, we could store a thumbnail of the picture in git, together with
the information where to retrieve the full picture. I tried to kick off
discussion about this a while ago but this didn't really go all that far.

What we need is a unified way to describe "where can you find the
picture".

> we definitely need to sync pictures (or thumbnails) somehow. it's a
> great feature.
> 
> Bad ideas: other (bad) things coming to mind are git-annex and git LFS
> (?). but those don't seem like fun things to have a dependency on.

No, definitely not.

> lastly, this might sound the most heretical of all, and yet it might
> be simplest:
>      what about (for the pictures only) using SVN? at least it would
> be a well-understood, stable C library (not haskell or ruby like
> git-annex and git LFS).

Now you are just trying to get me mad, right? :-)

>      librsync?
> 
> ok. enough mind-dump of ill-considered ideas for now :)

I don't think they are ill-considered as much as they are trying to fix
the wrong problem.

We can indeed have very small (<10k?) picture thumbnails in the git
repository. Plus a "URLlike-thingy" that tells us where to find a higher
resolution version. I think that is the reasonable next step.

/D
_______________________________________________
subsurface mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.subsurface-divelog.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/subsurface

Reply via email to