Re: [RFC] Linux Kernel Subversion Howto

Miles Bader
2005-02-09T08:58:43Z

Kevin Puetz <puetzk@puetzk.org> writes:
>> If you use svk <http://svk.elixus.org/> for the client side, there's
>> (almost?) no overhead.
>>
>> Regards, Olaf.
>
> erm, svk is cool and all, but it keeps a local repository mirror (not
> necessarily full I suppose, but usually it is). So it's *much* heavier on
> the client side than normal svn. Pays off in several ways, but just because
> it keeps it's weight in the depot folder instead of the wc folder doesn't
> make it ligher (unless you use several wc's I suppose).

Hmmm, I thought that several other systems had similar (or worse)
overhead -- most notably that bk and darcs have no real notion of a
"repository", but always store the entire history in every source tree.
Such a model seems to simplify the user interface in some cases, but
obviously can impact disk usage...

However I have no real experience with either bk or darcs; please
correct me if I'm wrong about this.

[This is as opposed to arch, which has a repository (local/remote)
model, and allows even repositories to contain only deltas from some
other repository.]

-Miles
--
Yo mama's so fat when she gets on an elevator it HAS to go down.