Received: from spf1.us4.outblaze.com (spf1.us4.outblaze.com [205.158.62.23]) by sdf.lonestar.org (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id iB62Pdqj008363 for ; Mon, 6 Dec 2004 02:25:40 GMT Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [199.232.76.165]) by spf1.us4.outblaze.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E1E7253A00 for ; Mon, 6 Dec 2004 02:25:43 +0000 (GMT) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1Cb8j5-0006mt-2a for migo@homemail.com; Sun, 05 Dec 2004 21:35:47 -0500 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.33) id 1Cb8ih-0006mo-2C for gnu-arch-users@gnu.org; Sun, 05 Dec 2004 21:35:23 -0500 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.33) id 1Cb8ig-0006mc-Cj for gnu-arch-users@gnu.org; Sun, 05 Dec 2004 21:35:22 -0500 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1Cb8ig-0006mZ-7h for gnu-arch-users@gnu.org; Sun, 05 Dec 2004 21:35:22 -0500 Received: from [129.255.60.186] (helo=ct.radiology.uiowa.edu) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1Cb8Yp-0004mK-Bn for gnu-arch-users@gnu.org; Sun, 05 Dec 2004 21:25:11 -0500 Received: from [192.168.1.11] (12-217-241-0.client.mchsi.com [12.217.241.0]) by ct.radiology.uiowa.edu (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id iB62PA300671; Sun, 5 Dec 2004 20:25:10 -0600 Message-ID: <41B3C303.7050107@arbash-meinel.com> Date: Sun, 05 Dec 2004 20:25:07 -0600 From: John A Meinel User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.9 (Windows/20041103) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Andrew Suffield Subject: Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Arch Versus CVS Versus Subversoin References: <20041205000613.PNEI7152.lakermmtao09.cox.net@nonerjsnum1tkq> <41B376B4.2060605@arbash-meinel.com> <20041206010853.GA2799@suffields.me.uk> <41B3B589.8010309@arbash-meinel.com> <20041206015722.GJ2799@suffields.me.uk> <41B3BF5A.903@arbash-meinel.com> <20041206021523.GA4544@suffields.me.uk> In-Reply-To: <20041206021523.GA4544@suffields.me.uk> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.89.0.0 X-Enigmail-Supports: pgp-inline, pgp-mime Cc: gnu-arch-users@gnu.org X-BeenThere: gnu-arch-users@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: a discussion list for all things arch-ish List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1663830364==" Sender: gnu-arch-users-bounces+migo=homemail.com@gnu.org Errors-To: gnu-arch-users-bounces+migo=homemail.com@gnu.org Status: RO Content-Length: 3111 Lines: 88 This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 2440 and 3156) --===============1663830364== Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="------------enig0B6E907555BB6DDA77A30657" This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 2440 and 3156) --------------enig0B6E907555BB6DDA77A30657 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Andrew Suffield wrote: > On Sun, Dec 05, 2004 at 08:09:30PM -0600, John A Meinel wrote: [...] > > > The difference in space consumed is not all that large for typical > applications. It's not a big deal. As always, nobody cares about it > enough to bother to implement it. Including you. > I don't know if I mentioned this earlier. *I* am fine with how arch does it. I agree that it isn't that big of a deal (I believe I've stated this). I think storing 2 copies of the file is a little expensive, but I perfectly understand why. It goes back to the idea that a single changeset is useful. If you don't store everything, then you need history, or something external. I understand why, and I certainly don't care to change it. *However* the original poster was asking if we do "binary diff like Subversion", and SVN's claim to fame is that they do delta compression on binary files. So when you responded with "yes we do, it works perfectly the same as SVN." You were incorrect. Actually, as far as stating that it should be called delta compression instead of binary diff goes against what I would consider the popular terminology. This is the first time I've heard it called delta compression, and though technically correct, it isn't commonly used. While I certainly will try to improve my usage, when someone asks about it, I would bet that 90% of the time they mean delta instead of diff. 99.999% if they are also mentioning SVN at the same time. To hopefully change topic slightly, does anyone know of a SCM that *doesn't* at least do something with binary files? I guess I read something that RCS had to uuencode and do a textual diff on the file. Do any of the modern ones fail to at least create full copies of the file? John =:-> --------------enig0B6E907555BB6DDA77A30657 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (Cygwin) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFBs8MDJdeBCYSNAAMRAmBgAJ0e4EdGB36PyBVslSZ2JZO5NcRvUACeNuak IuD4QtlfOuHsE/z9Sj6WdYY= =95LT -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --------------enig0B6E907555BB6DDA77A30657-- --===============1663830364== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ Gnu-arch-users mailing list Gnu-arch-users@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-arch-users GNU arch home page: http://savannah.gnu.org/projects/gnu-arch/ --===============1663830364==--