Git history is getting huge due to Jupyter Notebooks

Open
#129 7 comments 0 reactions 0 assignees View on GitHub

Nobody has claimed this yet.

Assessment

Difficulty
5/5
Estimated time
Over a week
Newbie friendliness
35/100
Issue type
Feature
Clarity
Needs clarification
Activity status
Active
Tech stack
git, jupyter-notebook
Domain
developer-experience

Research direction

Start by reviewing the repository's Git history and the reported 550 MB clone size. Compare the current branch-based workflow with the proposed fork and squash-merge approach, including its effect on contributors and clone size. Done means the project has a decided, documented approach rather than an unresolved question.

Written by the indexing model from the issue text.

Description

Just cloned the repo and noticed that it was taking quite some time, downloading 550 MB for a fairly low-LOC repo:
image

I wonder if there's any merit towards switching to a fork/squash-merge approach instead of the branch based? Realistically, that history is only ever going to become larger.

Counterpoint:

  • This repo is not really something many people outside devs clone so it might be overengineering.

wdyt @giovp @LucaMarconato ?

Dominant language
Jupyter Notebook
Stars
35
Forks
26
No merged PRs in 30d

Contributor guide

Open the contributing guide

First steps

  1. Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
  2. Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
  3. Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
  4. Open a pull request that references the issue number.

More from scverse/squidpy-tutorials

All issues in scverse/squidpy-tutorials

Similar issues

More DevTools issues

Get new issues in your inbox

A short digest of beginner-friendly GitHub issues.