Comment 12 for bug 116094
Revision history for this message
| Ian Clatworthy (ian-clatworthy) wrote Re: [Bug 116094] Re: local clone without shared repository is too slow | #12 |
© 2004
Canonical Ltd.
•
Terms of use
•
Data privacy
•
Contact Launchpad Support
•
Blog
•
Careers
•
System status
•
1b1ed1a
(Get the code!)
Robert Collins wrote:
> The question is 'is 20 minutes appropriate for cloning all the history
> of a project the size of OOo' ? And I think it is.
"time cp -a OOo-trunk OOo-fix" takes 1m24secs and that's starting from a
cold cache.
90 seconds is a longer break in concentration than most developers will
accept to start a feature branch. Even so, they can grab a cup of coffee
while it's happening (multiple times per day). 20 minutes for "bzr
branch" is *completely* unacceptable IMO. (They only stop for lunch once
a day.)
I don't have recent figures but I believe git and hg are both in the
ballpark for cp -a (or better). We cannot be 10-20X slower and expect
users not to complain.
Ian C.