Re: RFS: r-bioc-org.mm.eg.db
Hi again,
On 20.09.20 17:39, Steffen Möller wrote:
> Hi Étienne,
>
> On 20.09.20 11:09, Étienne Mollier wrote:
>> Hi Steffen,
>>
>> Steffen Möller, on 2020-09-20 04:02:39 +0200:
>>> Hello, the git archive occupies 421M on my disk, the tarball is 68MB,
>>> the package only 29MB, which I think is worth it. We have the human
>>> already in the archive, I would like the others to follow - which means
>>> rat, fly and worm to me.
>>>
>>> I presume that git tries to make sense of the sqlite database and this
>>> is why this bloats. Or is it just past version? Anyone with ideas how to
>>> reduce the impact on salsa?
>> I think `git lfs`, from the package "git-lfs", might help reduce
>> the size of large data oriented repositories. I have been
>> skimming through Salsa and Gitlab documentation, and I believe
>> this should be supported by Salsa as well. Salsa is said to
>> have all the features of Gitlab, and Gitlab advertises git lfs
>> support:
>>
>> https://wiki.debian.org/Salsa
>> https://docs.gitlab.com/ee/topics/git/lfs/index.html
>>
>> However, I never have had the occasion to use git lfs yet. I
>> only heard about it first during the presentation on "datalad".
>> But it sounds like it might be worth a try.
> I used it once and it works. Following your pointers I seem to lack the
> tools in Debian to support the transition to a git lfs repository, i.e.
> there are no https://rtyley.github.io/bfg-repo-cleaner/ tools and also
> the git filter-repo is not available.
>
> git lfs installation and tracking works like a charm, though.
From what I understand, the lfs helps those who check the files out
because of a smaller history, but the server side (salsa) does not
benefit, right? Maybe we should then just leave it for now.
Best,
Steffen
Reply to: