Excess data size for a single revision

Eli Zaretskii 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 mailing list