DDraceNetwork - developer

DDraceNetwork

Development / developer

Development discussion. Logged to https://ddnet.tw/irclogs/ Connected with DDNet's IRC channel, Matrix room and GitHub repositories — IRC: #ddnet on Quakenet | Matrix: #ddnet-developer:matrix.org GitHub: https://github.com/ddnet

Between 2017-07-20 00:00:00Z and 2017-07-21 00:00:00Z

<eeeee> wait what

02:42

<eeeee> did you just copy refactor to trunk again

<eeeee> deen: is there a way we can revert that back and discuss it more? i think moving external libs to a submodule but keeping existing history would be a better solution

02:51

<eeeee> saving a couple hundred megs isn't worth the extra pain in the ass while blaming imo

<eeeee> and if size really is a problem for someone, they can do shallow clone which would be pretty similar to this "cleaned up" repo

[ddnet-maps:master] 1 new commit

10684cd daily update - def-

<Learath2> given we have no common point in history all our branches are now un-mergeable with master :/

05:10

<eeeee> well you can just rebase to the head of ddnet-old then cherry-pick into first commit in new and then merge or keep rebasing

05:10

<Learath2> well rebase also uses a common history point

05:10

<Learath2> oic

05:11

<Learath2> "just"

05:11

<eeeee> it's a good git excercise but kinda annoying otherwise :D

<deen> eeeee: no one shallow-clones in my experience

06:12

<deen> so they would keep complaining about huge size of repo

<Learath2> for the record heinrich5991 was the first person complaining about the repo size i've seen in the last 5 years

06:23

<Learath2> fwiw as i wasn't around for some of those 5 years

<deen> I remember people complaining to me personally

06:51

<deen> anyway, I guess we can switch back to full repo and tell people to shallow clone

06:51

<deen> apparently you can even make PRs with recent versions of git with shallow clones.

<heinrich5991> I have repo version stripped of all binaries and data files

08:20

<heinrich5991> with still the full source history

08:20

<heinrich5991> 8.2 MB

08:21

<heinrich5991> would that be desirable?

no

i got a version with full history i think

08:24

but it was not updated to last version

<heinrich5991> (nothing was thrown away, see https://github.com/ddnet/ddnet-old/

08:24

<heinrich5991> )

ah

<heinrich5991> Ryozuki: the point of my question was rather whether that might be a good starting point for a new repo

08:25

<heinrich5991> eeeee: ^

08:25

<Ryozuki> i guess it's good then

08:32

<deen> it could still be desirable to have the old history in ddnet repo directly

08:33

<heinrich5991> yes, that would be it, but without data files etc.

08:33

<deen> but we can't use that for anything useful

08:33

<deen> since you can't rebuild the releases for it for example

08:33

<heinrich5991> yes

08:33

<heinrich5991> but we can use git blame

08:34

<deen> ah, you mean putting that under the current ddnet

08:34

<heinrich5991> yep

08:34

<deen> that sounds like it could cause quite some confusion

08:34

<deen> with the same commit messages in ddnet and ddnet-old but with different ids

08:35

<heinrich5991> steps to reproduce the smaller repo:

08:35

<heinrich5991> git clone --mirror https://github.com/ddnet/ddnet-old.git

08:35

<heinrich5991> bfg --no-blob-protection --delete-folders '{backup,data,docs,fonts,opus,other,portaudio,tilesets,versions,TEMP}' --delete-files '*.{exe,ttf}'

08:35

<heinrich5991> this gives you a commit id map as well

08:35

<heinrich5991> still confusing, but resolvable

08:36

<heinrich5991> https://rtyley.github.io/bfg-repo-cleaner/

[ddnet/ddnet] Issue opened: #798 move the map while typing

It would be nice if the map could move while typing. Like when you wanna follow what's happening to give advice.

716.97 KB

18:55

@deen @Learath2 Tropo gets deep even tho he should tower on BumM.. pretty lame bug and they failed a 200+min run on Tatooine 2

He clipped into bumm. Sad (edited)

19:00

Did tropo have weak or strong on bumm? (edited)

weak

<deen> So what's the best way forward for the ddnet repo?

do not change anything

19:42

less work

<deen> 1. Keep separate ddnet-old with old history

19:43

<deen> 2. Keep full history, 300 MB full clone, small shallow clone, can git blame, can build old versions

19:43

<deen> 3. Keep old history but with removed libs, small full clone, can git blame, can't build old versions

2.

<deen> but I did 1. already

How hard is to compile ddnet now? For non-experienced user?

19:44

i mean, not everycode have big experience with git

<deen> as hard as before, except you have to download one more repo

19:44

<deen> well, if you can download ddnet repo, you will manage to download ddnet-libs too

then stay as it is nwo

<deen> that has nothing to do with it

19:45

<deen> not sure what you're talking about

you need libs to compile ?

<deen> the current state would not change with any of the alternatives

19:45

<deen> you need libs if you don't have them installed on your system or you want to build releases

19:45

<deen> ideally you install them on your system and your package manager keeps them updated

i mean, maybe people wouldn't know what to do with seperated libs or something, if they don't know how to connect them. But probably you will describe this so

19:46

you need everything on Windows (Y0

<deen> i have separated libs already and will not reverse that, what are you talking about?

(y)

19:51

Nevermind, maybe and misunderstood something. I was talking about those libs: https://github.com/ddnet/ddnet-old/tree/fed747b9a0baf92f627cfaa42245ef99ce86e441/other They are neccessary for win i guess. Couldn't compile without them, but if you made it easy to move them to the right place, then nevermind

ddnet/ddnet-old

ddnet-old - Old DDNet source code, back when the repository contained external libraries. Exists only for historical reasons

<deen> ah, for building old versions?

19:52

<deen> with solution 3?

19:57

<deen> I don't like solution 3 anyway

<heinrich5991> the problem with 3 is that we have another "copied refactor to trunk"

<deen> so the question is if we're ok with carrying around the 300 MB history for everyone who makes a full clone

20:34

<deen> heinrich5991: since you're the one who complained, any thoughts on that?

20:35

<heinrich5991> I was mainly against adding even more binaries, I'm equally ok with 2 & 3

20:35

<heinrich5991> 2 is good because we don't invalidate any references

20:35

<deen> ok

20:36

<deen> so I'll do 2 now

20:36

<heinrich5991> 3 is good because we don't carry our historical size

20:36

<heinrich5991> thanks!

20:37

<deen> and should we use submodule? https://github.com/ddnet/ddnet/pull/797

20:38

<eeeee> i think 3 is definitely a big improvement on 1, but i'd vote for 2+submodule anyway

20:38

<heinrich5991> submodule vs what?

20:38

<heinrich5991> probably http download

20:39

<eeeee> dunno what are other options really. but github seems to support submodules nicely so that's a plus

20:40

<heinrich5991> yes, but have we gained anything then?

20:40

<heinrich5991> ah

20:40

<eeeee> we have stopped the repo from growing even bigger

20:41

<heinrich5991> my thoughts a few seconds ago: but we still have a repo we have to download anyway

20:41

<heinrich5991> but there seems to be an option to recommend doing a shallow clone of the submodule

20:41

<heinrich5991> saved by the bell

20:41

<heinrich5991> https://stackoverflow.com/a/38895397/870079

20:41

<heinrich5991> ignore the second to last line

20:41

<eeeee> can intergrate that into the build system, make it auto shallow clone submodule if missing

20:42

<heinrich5991> git config -f .gitmodules submodule.<name>.shallow true

20:42

<heinrich5991> that way it is integrated into git

20:42

<eeeee> oh, cool

[ddnet/ddnet] Pull request closed: #797 Add ddnet-libs as a submodule

21:10

[ddnet/ddnet] New branch created: new

21:10

[ddnet/ddnet] New branch created: try-punish

21:10

[ddnet:try-punish] 1 new commit

ef60bac First try - def-

21:10

[ddnet/ddnet] New branch created: try-timeout

21:10

[ddnet/ddnet] New branch created: heinrich5991-pr_ddnet_map_settings

21:10

[ddnet:heinrich5991-pr_ddnet_map_settings] 1 new commit

a047ea2 Merge branch 'pr_ddnet_map_settings' of https:/... - def-

21:10

[ddnet/ddnet] New branch created: freezepred

21:10

[ddnet:new_db_scheme] 1 new commit

1317d74 WIP - def-

21:10

[ddnet/ddnet] New branch created: timakro-master

<deen> oh, more than 10 years of history, nice

[ddnet-web:master] 1 new commit

f712b86 Revert "Update github links" - def-

21:15

[ddnet:master] 1 new commit

f34c6f5 New try at adding submodule - def-

21:22

[ddnet/ddnet] New tag created: included-libs

[ddnet:master] 2 new commits

0b90cef Update instructions - def- 886be97 Try to fix automated builds with submodule - def-

[ddnet:master] 1 new commit

1683b71 Try to fix cmake for windows - def-

<deen> Anyone want to fix the cmake build on windows? https://ci.appveyor.com/project/def-/ddnet

21:57

<Spongebob> me

<Learath2> well heinrich5991 is the cmake-magician :P

Exported 126 message(s)