From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Linus Torvalds Subject: Re: VCS comparison table Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2006 16:16:15 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: References: <9e4733910610140807p633f5660q49dd2d2111c9f5fe@mail.gmail.com> <200610172351.17377.jnareb@gmail.com> <4535590C.4000004@utoronto.ca> <200610180057.25411.jnareb@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Cc: Andreas Ericsson , bazaar-ng@lists.canonical.com, git@vger.kernel.org X-From: bazaar-ng-bounces@lists.canonical.com Wed Oct 18 01:16:58 2006 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvbg-bazaar-ng@m.gmane.org Received: from esperanza.ubuntu.com ([82.211.81.173]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GZyB8-0004bO-6q for gcvbg-bazaar-ng@m.gmane.org; Wed, 18 Oct 2006 01:16:58 +0200 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=esperanza.ubuntu.com) by esperanza.ubuntu.com with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1GZyAw-0003b1-Ry; Wed, 18 Oct 2006 00:16:46 +0100 Received: from smtp.osdl.org ([65.172.181.4]) by esperanza.ubuntu.com with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1GZyAs-0003aw-Ts for bazaar-ng@lists.canonical.com; Wed, 18 Oct 2006 00:16:44 +0100 Received: from shell0.pdx.osdl.net (fw.osdl.org [65.172.181.6]) by smtp.osdl.org (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id k9HNGKaX008063 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=EDH-RSA-DES-CBC3-SHA bits=168 verify=NO); Tue, 17 Oct 2006 16:16:25 -0700 Received: from localhost (shell0.pdx.osdl.net [10.9.0.31]) by shell0.pdx.osdl.net (8.13.1/8.11.6) with ESMTP id k9HNGF8W010219; Tue, 17 Oct 2006 16:16:17 -0700 To: Jakub Narebski In-Reply-To: <200610180057.25411.jnareb@gmail.com> X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.473 required=5 tests=AWL X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63-osdl_revision__1.95__ X-MIMEDefang-Filter: osdl$Revision: 1.155 $ X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.36 X-BeenThere: bazaar-ng@lists.canonical.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.8 Precedence: list List-Id: bazaar-ng discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: bazaar-ng-bounces@lists.canonical.com Errors-To: bazaar-ng-bounces@lists.canonical.com Archived-At: On Wed, 18 Oct 2006, Jakub Narebski wrote: > > Perhaps it would be nice to have "bundles" in git too. As of now > we can save arbitrary part of history in a pack, but it is binary > not textual representation. > > Some of git workflow stems from old, pre-SCM Linux kernel workflow > of sending _patches_ via email. Actually, the reason to _not_ have bundles very much stems from the fact that BK did have bundles, and they were pretty horrid. It would be easy to send the exact same data as the native git protocol sends over ssh (or the git port) as an email encoding. We did that a few times with BK (there it's called "bk send" and "bk receive" to pack and unpack those things), and after doing it about five times, I absolutely refused to ever do it again. There's just no point, except to make your mailbox grow without bounds, and it was really annoying. So sending things as patches is just a lot more convenient if you want emails. And if you want to sync two repos directly, I think we've gotten sufficiently past the old UUCP days when you want to use email as a packetization medium. That said, "bundles" certainly wouldn't be _hard_ to do. And as long as nobody tries to send _me_ any of them, I won't mind ;) Linus