[darcs-users] Re: A few comments about Git

[Stephen J. Turnbull]

>>>>> "Juliusz" == Juliusz Chroboczek <Juliusz.Chroboczek at pps.jussieu.fr> writes:

    >> BTW, for the archives of patches and pristines it might be a
    >> good idea to (eventually) go to git as the basic backend.

    Juliusz> No.  Darcs-Git will never work really well.

I'm not talking about Darcs-Git ...

    Juliusz> Some minor flaws aside, the Darcs repo format is designed
    Juliusz> for Darcs.  It contains the information that Darcs needs
    Juliusz> to operate efficiently, such as for example patches in
    Juliusz> commuted form.

So what?  Git (as advertised) is not a full-fledged SCM---the
advertisements even claim that the porcelain included in Git is not
intended for real work.  It is a content-addressable file system
(sorta).  Git blobs are, well, blobs.

I suspect you already see this, but to give other people an idea of
what we're talking about, let me unpack that.  I see no reason you
can't put a patch in a blob.  That gives you a canonical name for the
patch (we already have that, but this one is Linus-brand, almost as
good as say "Hermes").  Obviously you can put your pristine in a blob.
That gives you a flat-structured[1] pristine, and

    `find . -name whatever -exec munge \{} \;'

no longer can find `whatever' under _darcs/current.

Seems like you're thinking similar thoughts:

    Juliusz> I'd like to see [Git] become the standard interchange
    Juliusz> format for transferring data between revision control
    Juliusz> systems[.]



Footnotes: 
[1]  Abstractly; of course a git database as currently implemented is
several layers deep.

-- 
School of Systems and Information Engineering http://turnbull.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp
University of Tsukuba                    Tennodai 1-1-1 Tsukuba 305-8573 JAPAN
               Ask not how you can "do" free software business;
              ask what your business can "do for" free software.