From: David Bergman (David.Bergman_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-06-07 18:08:20
My MacPorts describes GIT as "the stupid content tracker"...
Has anybody used GIT - outside of Linux kernel development? Should we
not focus our energy elsewhere; something more pragmatic, such as
porting Boost to D? ;-)
I was pretty impressed - as well - by GIT when testing it out, and
even more so by testing 'darcs' out. But, one seems to always need a
central repository anyways, which kind of contradicts - and perhaps
even counteracts - the distributed nature of these systems. As David
Abrahams points out, these distributed attempts often has a -
officially or not - central node, which mirrors the quasi-shared
development of those projects...
On Jun 7, 2007, at 4:02 PM, Henrik Sundberg wrote:
> 2007/6/7, Phil Richards <news_at_[hidden]>:
>> On Thu, 07 Jun 2007 10:21:10 -0400, David Abrahams wrote:
>>> Yeah; I get the impression that GIT even deals correctly with
>>> of code moving across files.
>> I believe that that impression is incorrect. Because GIT tracks file
>> state only (no explicit rename or copy tracking), it use a similarity
>> comparison between states to try and identify when a rename actually
>> occurred so it can track the "history" of content. If a fragment is
>> moved, the similarity check will not identify that fragment. The two
>> files will end up being viewed as completely independent by all
>> parts of
>> GIT including the merge algorithms.
> I got the same impression as David. This was highlighted as something
> special to GIT.
> Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, david.abrahams at rcn.com, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk