Re: Modification of Nettoe
Ivan Vu$(D+-(Bica <email@example.com> writes:
> From what I understand, DVCS'es create a copy of entire repository on local
> disk, an entire history, right? Do I, as a dev, need the entire history of the
> project on my local disk? Not really, even as-is having SVN create a full copy
> is too much for me. I have 2 operating systems on my 60gb HDD and each is
> stuffed full of software and data.,A (B
A Git repository with >1000 commits including the entire history of a
project is often smaller than all those .svn-directories for a single
Git might probably not be the right VCS for storing (large) images that
are often changed. The repository would probably grow very fast in that
> Besides, check-out of project's entire history probably creates more traffic
> than check-out of just the latest data. While it may be neat to have history of
> the project at your fingertips at any single moment, in practice I've found I
> very rarely dig into old history, and almost never through CLI. At most, I use
> revert into latest fetched revision.
For the traffic, see the argument above, although I don't know in detail
how SVN and Git send data over the network.
I also almost never use "svn log", mainly because it takes way too long
to display anything ;) When using Git, I look at the history much more
> I didn't take my time to study git or any other DVCS; but, from comments I saw
> around the net I think I have some understanding of why they exist and how they
> are used. Based on my understanding,,A (BDVCS'es aren't really a cure-for-all.
> Projects that large time before a patch can be created and where it would be
> convenient to see history of how the patch was created. But, do I need it when
> I can commit every 30 min or less, and not break the build? Can't the history
> be inferred from single commit log by those 2 other guys that work on
> the code?
> How often do we need to branch?
> How often will developer(s) of nettoe do that? How often will they
> need a local copy of entire repo?
I'm not sure I understand all of your questions here. In any case, you
can use Git similar to a centralized VCS by pushing all your changes
immediately to a central repository. I actually mostly use Git in this
way for my own small projects (plus local branches for experiments).
Local branches are also a nice feature, and being able to commit without
an internet connection as well. Especially when you like to commit
> Please correct me if any of my presumptions about DVCS are wrong, I'd love to
> correct any misunderstandings I may have.
There are several other advantages when using Git, some of which only
apply to people w/o commit rights:
It is easier for others to start working on the project as they can
also use a VCS when working on their patches. With SVN it is not
possible to have many of the benefits of a VCS without commit
Git makes it easy to submit patches by email. This is also convenient
when having no commit rights. In the history credit is also given to
the person providing the patch (the committer is shown as well).
Every object (file, commit) in Git is secured with a cryptographic hash,
tags can be signed using PGP. This makes a compromise of the repository
Also you have many backups of the repository as every checkout contains
the complete history. Much harder to lose all data ;)
Many other DVCSs have similar benefits, but I do not think SVN/CVS offer