> Am 14.05.2020 um 04:52 schrieb matthew sporleder <msporleder%gmail.com@localhost>: > > > >> On May 13, 2020, at 10:11 PM, John Franklin <franklin%elfie.org@localhost> wrote: >> >> On Apr 30, 2020, at 21:28, bch <brad.harder%gmail.com@localhost> wrote: >>> >>> I thought the plan to move to HG hasn't been finalised yet, am I missing something? Plus, why HG and not Fossil, if the end-result consumption is via Git anyways? >>> >>> [...] >> >> There are scalability issues with Mercurial, too. I cloned NetBSD src on a 1GB RAM, 1GB swap, 4 CPU VM (Debian Buster) using git from the GitHub project and from anonhg.netbsd.org. >> >> [...] > > This argument does not work. I went through the same goalpost moving exercise years ago and martin@ even got some efficiency patches into git as a result, but the super low memory shallow clone is not even good enough. I think the argument works very well - at least to stay at CVS forever >:-) I doubt that you'll find a modern solution running fine on any 4M computer. Network filesystems, cross compilers etc. where invented to support machines which can't provide all required resources for a job on their own. Cheers -- Jens Rehsack - rehsack%gmail.com@localhost
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP