[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Gnu-arch-users] Re: Arch Versus CVS Versus Subversoin
From: |
Stefan Monnier |
Subject: |
[Gnu-arch-users] Re: Arch Versus CVS Versus Subversoin |
Date: |
Mon, 06 Dec 2004 15:00:54 -0500 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/21.3.50 (gnu/linux) |
I think the discussion is misleading.
There are two concepts being discussed:
- the "generic binary diff" where there is no known meaningful diff/merge
algorithm: the only things the user can hope for is to get back the
exact BLOB he commited, and that the network/cpu/disk resources be
used efficiently. Arch supports those forms of "binary diff" fairly well
in terms of semantics (you do get back the exact BLOB you committed and
you can even apply a binary patch as it dosn't have to merge two
changes). In terms of resource consumption, it's not great because it
doesn't try to do things like delta compression.
I.e. it's about the same as CVS.
- the "file-type specific diff", when you want to do revision control on
objects where diff/diff3/patch don't work well but where there are
tools which can do the work of diff/diff3/patch in a meaningful way.
tla only supports 2 types of objects: text-file (using diff/diff3/patch)
and directory (where tla itself takes care of merging adds/removes/...).
It would be useful to be able to plug in more file-type specific
diff/diff3/patch replacement tools, for things like XML data.
It could also be used to implement .arch-ids files (instead of directories)
with their own diff/diff3/patch imlpementation.
Finally it could be used to plug in your favorite vdelta algorithm
for those BLOBs where there's no better alternative.
I.e. I don't see the point in improving point 1 since it's only a question
of resource usage, whereas point 2 would both improve the user's experience
and solve ponit 1 as well.
Stefan
- [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Arch Versus CVS Versus Subversoin, (continued)
- [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Arch Versus CVS Versus Subversoin, Matthew Palmer, 2004/12/05
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Arch Versus CVS Versus Subversoin, Stephen J. Turnbull, 2004/12/05
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Arch Versus CVS Versus Subversoin, Thomas Lord, 2004/12/06
- [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Arch Versus CVS Versus Subversoin,
Stefan Monnier <=
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Arch Versus CVS Versus Subversoin, Florian Weimer, 2004/12/06
- [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Arch Versus CVS Versus Subversoin, Stefan Monnier, 2004/12/06
- [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Arch Versus CVS Versus Subversoin, Charles Duffy, 2004/12/06
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Arch Versus CVS Versus Subversoin, Bruce Stephens, 2004/12/06
- [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Arch Versus CVS Versus Subversoin, Charles Duffy, 2004/12/06
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Arch Versus CVS Versus Subversoin, Aaron Bentley, 2004/12/06
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Arch Versus CVS Versus Subversoin, Bruce Stephens, 2004/12/06
- [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Re: Arch Versus CVS Versus Subversoin, Charles Duffy, 2004/12/06
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Re: Arch Versus CVS Versus Subversoin, Bruce Stephens, 2004/12/06
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Arch Versus CVS Versus Subversoin, John A Meinel, 2004/12/06