Re: git guidance

Johannes Schindelin
2007-11-28T18:15:28Z

Hi,

On Wed, 28 Nov 2007, Al Boldi wrote:

> git@vger sometimes bounces, so let's leave lkml as backup.

Fair enough.

> Johannes Schindelin wrote:
> > On Wed, 28 Nov 2007, Rogan Dawes wrote:
> > > Al Boldi wrote:
> > > > Willy Tarreau wrote:
> > > > > It should not turn into an endless thread led by people who want
> > > > > to redefine GIT's roadmap, but experience sharing helps a lot
> > > > > with GIT.
> > > >
> > > > Well, now that you mentioned it, if there is one thing I dislike,
> > > > it's for version control to start mutilating your sources.
> > > > Version Control should be completely transparent. GIT isn't.
> > >
> > > Care to explain? Git is quite happy handling arbitrary binary
> > > content, so I find it difficult to believe that it is changing your
> > > source code in strange ways.
> >
> > It is nice of you to ask him to explain: Unless this handwaving claim
> > is substantiated, it is quite hard to argue with.
>
> Sure, the problem with GIT is that it stores the sources inside a
> backend container that is only accessible via GIT; iow, you can't
> retrieve your sources directly / transparently.

That is a very funny way to define a "transparent SCM". Are you
complaining about SQL servers being "not transparent"?

By that definition, no SCM, not even CVS, is transparent. Nothing short
of unpacked directories of all versions (wasting a lot of disk space)
would.

IOW the issue you raised is a non-issue.

Ciao,
Dscho