From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Abrahams Subject: Re: [doc] User Manual Suggestion Date: Wed, 29 Apr 2009 09:27:11 -0400 Message-ID: References: <200904240051.46233.johan@herland.net> <200904242230.13239.johan@herland.net> <20090424213848.GA14493@coredump.intra.peff.net> <4E155CC5-B20A-4B79-8CBF-9D1E0E36920F@boostpro.com> <20090425003531.GA18125@coredump.intra.peff.net> <1A9F6DB0-983F-4A5B-B3B7-33227C11F36A@boostpro.com> <20090429063448.GA22448@coredump.intra.peff.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v930.4) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: git@vger.kernel.org To: Jeff King X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Wed Apr 29 15:28:00 2009 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1Lz9pO-0001kQ-7i for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Wed, 29 Apr 2009 15:27:58 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757457AbZD2N1R (ORCPT ); Wed, 29 Apr 2009 09:27:17 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1756169AbZD2N1Q (ORCPT ); Wed, 29 Apr 2009 09:27:16 -0400 Received: from boost-consulting.com ([206.71.190.141]:64029 "EHLO boost-consulting.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753691AbZD2N1P (ORCPT ); Wed, 29 Apr 2009 09:27:15 -0400 Received: from [192.168.188.134] (207-172-223-249.c3-0.smr-ubr3.sbo-smr.ma.static.cable.rcn.com [207.172.223.249]) (Authenticated sender: dave) by boost-consulting.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id B22F71CC1F; Wed, 29 Apr 2009 06:24:31 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20090429063448.GA22448@coredump.intra.peff.net> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.930.4) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Apr 29, 2009, at 2:34 AM, Jeff King wrote: > On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 08:53:37PM -0400, David Abrahams wrote: > >>> Actually, it is not the generally of trees that I think is >>> interesting >>> there, but the generality of _objects_. That is, each of those >>> things is >>> a first-class object, and has a unique name by which it can be >>> referred. >> >> I'm sorry, but I think most people would find that so unremarkable >> that >> making a big deal about it would lead to "what am I missing here" >> confusion. Maybe a person who's exclusively used CVS (or older) >> technologies before coming to Git would be happy to know that, but >> it's >> sort of obvious. In CVS the lack of first-class directories sticks >> out >> like a sore thumb. > > Sadly, I was away from email all weekend and so missed the ensuing > storm > in this thread. :) However, I did want to respond to this one point. > > To me (and I am talking from personal experience, so it really may be > _just_ me), an important part of understanding git was understanding > the > object storage. That is, half of the idea of git is a big database of > content-addressable objects. Absolutely, it's important to know that everything is content- addressable (which essentially communicates the same important information as "the object's id is a hash of its contents"). I was trying to say that the fact that each one is a "first-class" object and has a unique name is not particularly remarkable. -- David Abrahams BoostPro Computing http://boostpro.com