Received: from spf5.us4.outblaze.com (spf5.us4.outblaze.com [205.158.62.27]) by sdf.lonestar.org (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id iB6K26LV027725 for ; Mon, 6 Dec 2004 20:02:07 GMT Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [199.232.76.165]) by spf5.us4.outblaze.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6752276FF1 for ; Mon, 6 Dec 2004 20:02:06 +0000 (GMT) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CbPDP-0001SJ-W2 for migo@homemail.com; Mon, 06 Dec 2004 15:12:12 -0500 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.33) id 1CbPD3-0001Ry-Hy for gnu-arch-users@gnu.org; Mon, 06 Dec 2004 15:11:49 -0500 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.33) id 1CbPD2-0001RT-Fx for gnu-arch-users@gnu.org; Mon, 06 Dec 2004 15:11:48 -0500 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CbPD2-0001RJ-Cv for gnu-arch-users@gnu.org; Mon, 06 Dec 2004 15:11:48 -0500 Received: from [132.204.24.67] (helo=mercure.iro.umontreal.ca) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1CbP2b-0001Yz-TB for gnu-arch-users@gnu.org; Mon, 06 Dec 2004 15:01:02 -0500 Received: from hidalgo.iro.umontreal.ca (hidalgo.iro.umontreal.ca [132.204.27.50]) by mercure.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 98E328282B8; Mon, 6 Dec 2004 15:01:01 -0500 (EST) Received: from asado.iro.umontreal.ca (asado.iro.umontreal.ca [132.204.24.84]) by hidalgo.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id F07244AC660; Mon, 6 Dec 2004 15:00:54 -0500 (EST) Received: by asado.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix, from userid 20848) id DE85E8CA69; Mon, 6 Dec 2004 15:00:54 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: To: gnu-arch-users@gnu.org References: <20041205000613.PNEI7152.lakermmtao09.cox.net@nonerjsnum1tkq> <26E1F314-4654-11D9-AD55-000A957659CC@spy.net> <20041205023828.GA11443@suffields.me.uk> <87pt1o9kvb.fsf@tleepslib.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> <200412061850.iB6IoWmS036469@xl2.seyza.com> From: Stefan Monnier Date: Mon, 06 Dec 2004 15:00:54 -0500 In-Reply-To: <200412061850.iB6IoWmS036469@xl2.seyza.com> (Thomas Lord's message of "Mon, 6 Dec 2004 10:50:32 -0800 (PST)") User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/21.3.50 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-DIRO-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information X-DIRO-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-DIRO-MailScanner-SpamCheck: n'est pas un polluriel, SpamAssassin (score=-3.332, requis 5, autolearn=not spam, AWL 1.57, BAYES_00 -4.90) X-MailScanner-From: monnier@iro.umontreal.ca Subject: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Arch Versus CVS Versus Subversoin 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: , 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: 1832 Lines: 43 I think the discussion is misleading. There are two concepts being discussed: - the "generic binary diff" where there is no known meaningful diff/merge algorithm: the only things the user can hope for is to get back the exact BLOB he commited, and that the network/cpu/disk resources be used efficiently. Arch supports those forms of "binary diff" fairly well in terms of semantics (you do get back the exact BLOB you committed and you can even apply a binary patch as it dosn't have to merge two changes). In terms of resource consumption, it's not great because it doesn't try to do things like delta compression. I.e. it's about the same as CVS. - the "file-type specific diff", when you want to do revision control on objects where diff/diff3/patch don't work well but where there are tools which can do the work of diff/diff3/patch in a meaningful way. tla only supports 2 types of objects: text-file (using diff/diff3/patch) and directory (where tla itself takes care of merging adds/removes/...). It would be useful to be able to plug in more file-type specific diff/diff3/patch replacement tools, for things like XML data. It could also be used to implement .arch-ids files (instead of directories) with their own diff/diff3/patch imlpementation. Finally it could be used to plug in your favorite vdelta algorithm for those BLOBs where there's no better alternative. I.e. I don't see the point in improving point 1 since it's only a question of resource usage, whereas point 2 would both improve the user's experience and solve ponit 1 as well. Stefan _______________________________________________ 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/