[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       mercurial
Subject:    Re: topic extension
From:       Arne Babenhauserheide <arne_bab () web ! de>
Date:       2017-10-09 19:43:09
Message-ID: 87bmlgkswg.fsf () web ! de
[Download RAW message or body]

[Attachment #2 (multipart/signed)]


David Demelier <markand@malikania.fr> writes:

> On Thu, 2017-10-05 at 19:33 +0200, Arne Babenhauserheide wrote:
>> Raffaele Salmaso <raffaele@salmaso.org> writes:
>> > Named branches can be heavy, expecially with large repositories.
>> 
>> What do you mean by heavy? And did you test this?
>> (I once ran tests with 10k branches without getting into problems)
>> 
>
> As they store the branch information in the changeset for ever. Using
> branches locally and never share them is not a problem though.

Keep in mind that this stored information does not take much space (and
it quickly disappears in compression) and that if branches are closed,
they do not clutter the interface. Therefore they are not heavy: a
single commit hash takes up much more space than the branch information.

Best wishes,
Arne
-- 
Unpolitisch sein
heißt politisch sein
ohne es zu merken

["signature.asc" (application/pgp-signature)]
[Attachment #6 (text/plain)]

_______________________________________________
Mercurial mailing list
Mercurial@mercurial-scm.org
https://www.mercurial-scm.org/mailman/listinfo/mercurial


[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]