Excess data size for a single revision
eliz at gnu.org
Wed Jan 25 04:10:03 UTC 2012
> From: Stefan Monnier <monnier at iro.umontreal.ca>
> Cc: Eli Zaretskii <eliz at gnu.org>, john at arbash-meinel.com, mbp at sourcefrog.net, bazaar at lists.canonical.com
> Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2012 21:44:29 -0500
> > Nobody else seems particularly interested in either of these tedious
> > jobs (updating years, merging between branches) so I did them to the
> > best of my abilities.
> AFAICT you did it just fine, indeed. The size of those revisions is
> a bit annoying, but I don't think it's that bad. Furthermore, I don't
> know how we could have done it better. AFAIK, even if we had applied
> the patch to the emacs-23 branch first and then merged it into trunk and
> that went all very smoothly (e.g. no spurious conflicts), I believe Bzr
> would have shown the same large data size on both branches, i.e. it
> would not have helped.
You are missing the point. I didn't complain about the large size of
the revision that changes all 2000 files. I complained about the
revision that changes twice that much, for some reason. See the
numbers shown by John in his analysis of the merge commit.
More information about the bazaar