From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: david@lang.hm Subject: Re: Git User's Survey 2008 partial summary, part 5 - other SCM Date: Sun, 14 Sep 2008 20:39:59 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: References: <200809031607.19722.jnareb@gmail.com> <200809112214.18366.jnareb@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Cc: Jakub Narebski , git@vger.kernel.org To: Nguyen Thai Ngoc Duy X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Mon Sep 15 05:44:00 2008 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 1Kf50J-0000gO-OY for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Mon, 15 Sep 2008 05:44:00 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753799AbYIODjK (ORCPT ); Sun, 14 Sep 2008 23:39:10 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753784AbYIODjJ (ORCPT ); Sun, 14 Sep 2008 23:39:09 -0400 Received: from mail.lang.hm ([64.81.33.126]:39573 "EHLO bifrost.lang.hm" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753764AbYIODjI (ORCPT ); Sun, 14 Sep 2008 23:39:08 -0400 Received: from asgard.lang.hm (asgard.lang.hm [10.0.0.100]) by bifrost.lang.hm (8.13.4/8.13.4/Debian-3) with ESMTP id m8F3d4uh004776; Sun, 14 Sep 2008 20:39:04 -0700 X-X-Sender: dlang@asgard.lang.hm In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Alpine 1.10 (DEB 962 2008-03-14) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Sun, 14 Sep 2008, Nguyen Thai Ngoc Duy wrote: > On 9/12/08, Jakub Narebski wrote: >> 15) Do you miss features in git that you know from other SCMs? >> If yes, what features are these (and from which SCM)? >> (Open ended text - Essay) >> >> Total respondents 1046 (some/many of them wrote 'no') >> skipped this question 1249 >> >> This is just a very quick summary, based on a first few pages of >> responses, Full analysis is I think best left for after closing the >> survey, because I think this would be a lot of work... >> >> So here is preliminary list, or rather beginning of one: >> * sparse/partial checkout and clone (e.g. Perforce) > > Have not read the survey result, but do you recall what is the most > used term for sparse/partial checkout? What SCMs do sparse/partial > checkout? I think it could be usable as it is now in my > will-be-sent-again series, but I don't really know how people want it > to from that. the most common use-case is people who want to follow a project but (at least think that they) don't need the history. so they want to save time/bandwideth/disk space by not downloading things they don't need. David Lang