Skip to content
This repository has been archived by the owner on Feb 22, 2020. It is now read-only.

140MB fresh repo size (without much code or data, not using LFS) #59

Closed
5 tasks done
WGierke opened this issue Aug 20, 2017 · 3 comments
Closed
5 tasks done

140MB fresh repo size (without much code or data, not using LFS) #59

WGierke opened this issue Aug 20, 2017 · 3 comments

Comments

@WGierke
Copy link
Contributor

WGierke commented Aug 20, 2017

Expected Behavior

After cloning using Git (and without LFS), after 30 commits and without test data, the repository should only be at most a few MB in size.

Current Behavior

It's over 140 MB when cloning the master.
screenshot from 2017-08-20 23-47-45

Possible Solution

I guess that the reason is that in the beginning even big files were pushed using Git. When they were then transferred to Git LFS, they weren't removed from the "normal" Git history.

Steps to Reproduce

  1. Clone the repository
  2. Check its size (including hidden folders such as .git)

Context (Environment)

Detailed Description

Possible Implementation

Would it be possible to remove those big files from the history using references like Removing sensitive data from a repository or How to remove/delete a large file from commit history in Git repository?? Unfortunately, I'm not that familiar with LFS or history rewriting...

Checklist before submitting

  • I have confirmed this using the officially supported Docker Compose setup using the local.py configuration and ensured that I built the containers again and they reflect the most recent version of the project at the HEAD commit on the master branch
  • I have searched through the other currently open issues and am confident this is not a duplicate of an existing bug
  • I provided a minimal code snippet or list of steps that reproduces the bug.
  • I provided screenshots where appropriate
  • I filled out all the relevant sections of this template
@reubano
Copy link
Contributor

reubano commented Aug 22, 2017

Tagging this as official (CR #17 and 7d46f08)

@pjbull
Copy link
Member

pjbull commented Aug 25, 2017

@lamby I think we may need to rewrite history to reduce this size. Can you take the lead on:
(1) seeing if that would work
(2) making sure the history rewrite won't majorly mess up people's existing forks/PRs (?)

@isms
Copy link
Contributor

isms commented Oct 5, 2017

Considering closing this issue - it's a data-intensive development environment in the best case so this doesn't seem to be blocking anything. Thoughts?

@isms isms closed this as completed Oct 10, 2017
@isms isms unassigned lamby Oct 17, 2018
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

5 participants