Contributors mailing list archives
Re: Procedure to create 16.0 branchesby "Richard deMeester" <email@example.com> - 21/07/2022 05:07:03
T: (03) 9135 1900 | M: 0403 76 76 76 | A: 10/435 Williamstown Road, Port Melbourne, 3207
Sent: Thursday, 21 July 2022 4:47 AM
To: Contributors <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Subject: Re: Procedure to create 16.0 branches
- commits SHA are different with current behaviour
- commits SHA are equal with proposed oneMoreover, for your size problem, current behaviour is taking more place than proposed one as new main branches are sharing same commits with preceding one.
You can test it locally (I did it) with git rev-list --disk-usage --objects --all
So, that point is solved.
On Wed, Jul 20, 2022 at 7:57 PM Pedro M. Baeza (Tecnativa) <email@example.com> wrote:
Dennis, the images unfortunately are not shown (Odoo/OCA instance bug), but the point in `This will increase the size of the repository the same, as no common ancestor and then different SHA.` is that it will affect the same on size on one procedure or the other.
> I see advantages here as currently if a module is not there, that does not mean if it is migrated yet or has been deprecated. With proposed approach, you can detect it more easily (present in previous branch, not in current. Moreover in the commit history you can see why it has been deprecated and learn about changes you maybe missed).
I don't get your point here, but it's the same good or bad, as it depends when a possible new module has arrived on prior branches.
> From several same approach repositories knowledge, I would say this will lead to a cleaner situation and an easier newcomers contribution processes understanding.
I have already expressed why it won't be cleaner and the problem not only for newcomers, but for existing contributors or reviewers.