You are not logged in.
The asp utility is recommended by the ArchWiki but I see no reason why use it over git, for example if I would like to clone the "linux" package I would simply use
git clone --single-branch --branch packages/linux https://github.com/archlinux/svntogit-packages.git
The only difference I can see is when using pure git, the cloned repo uses slightly more disk space (about 2.3MB more), however I do not understand the reason of adding another layer of complexity (asp) just to save some MB.
* What is the reason to use asp?
* Also, should I trust any package under https://github.com/archlinux/svntogit-community and https://github.com/archlinux/svntogit-packages ?
Last edited by thejavascriptman (2020-12-03 12:06:53)
Offline
The difference is mostly just simplicity. The savings you're seeing is probably because asp can also grab a snapshot instead of the actual git repo.
I too use git directly, never touched asp.
Offline
One point is that asp is aware of what you're tracking (via its cache), so the update command can be run from anywhere to update all tracked repos.
I stuck to git too, and further use subtree to reduce the repo to a standalone AUR-like repo:
git subtree split -P trunk/ -b trunk
#push it somewhere, rename the branch if required
git push http://git-server/arch-packages/package.git trunk:master
Offline
Thanks for the explanations, I just learned about git subtree and works great for my case.
Offline