[llvm-dev] [RFC] One or many git repositories?

[Renato Golin via llvm-dev]

On 28 July 2016 at 20:05, Justin Lebar <jlebar at google.com> wrote:
> If DragonEgg is abandoned, I think we should keep the history in our
> repository and just delete it from head.

This is interesting proposition.

IIGIR, you want to move *all* locked repos to the new format, then
delete there, so we can keep the history.

I was going to say "burn them all with fire", but I think this may be
a more civil solution. However, there's also a cut there. There are
histories we want to keep, others we don't, and it's not just about
how coupled they were.

For instance...

http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/?sortby=date#dirlist

There are three very clear groups: days, months, years.

You don't want to keep even the history of anything older than 3 years
there. Those things can be zipped and kept in a corner and no one will
touch it. If they do, it would be for archaeological curiosity and a
zip file would do.

Things in the "months" time frame could warrant discussion to keep the
history, but probably not the code. Klee, dragonegg, vmkit, safecode
were interesting projects, I'd keep their history, not code. www-pubs
is for the website, we need to keep the code. The tests are probably
worth keeping the code, too, if relevant (I have no idea). I'm not
sure what happened to poolalloc.

Everything in the days block stays as mono/pluri-repo.


> No, right?  lld's history is part of our history.  We'd just delete it
> from head and move on with our lives.

LLD is a pretty important project. Not all the old repos were as
important as LLD, even on the prime of their times.

Most of those would have been personal GitHub repositories that either
migrated to llvm-projs because it became important, was merged to the
monorepo, or died away a quiet and lonely death.

cheers,
--renato