Re: gitpacker progress report and a question

Felipe Contreras [off-list ref]:

1) I tried it, and it doesn't seem to import (pack?) are repository
with sub-directories in it

I'll make sure my regression test checks this case.  The options to git 
ls-files are a bit confusing and it's possible my invocation of it
needs to change.
 

2) Using 'git fast-import' is probably simpler, and more efficient

That might well be.  I'm not worried about "efficiency" in this context 
but reducing the code size is significant and I'm willing to re-code
to do that.
 

Here is a proof of concept I wrote in ruby that is half the size, and
seems to implement the same functionality.

Not anywhere near the same.  It only handles commits, not tags. It
doesn't issue delete ops.  And it doesn't rebuild branch heads.
If I were willing to omit those features, I'm sure I could halve
the size of my implementation, too.  Of course, it would then be
almost completely useless...

                          The format is exactly the
same, but I think it should be modified to be more efficient.

I'm not wedded to the log format as it is, so I'll cheerfully
take suggestions about it.

Be aware, however, that I consider easy editability by human beings
much more important than squeezing the last microsecond out of the
processing time.  So, for example, I won't use data byte counts rather
than end delimiters, the way import streams do.
-- 
		<a href="http://www.catb.org/~esr/">Eric S. Raymond</a>