On Tue, 2008-09-30 at 17:37 -0400, Todd Zullinger wrote: > Ralf Corsepius wrote: > > SVN's major "con" is it being comparatively generous on local > > diskspace and it polluting a checked out source trees with huge > > amount of VCS-metadata files (git, mercurial do so as well). > > Git and mercurial both keep their files in one top-level dir, e.g. > .git or .hg. Try a recursive grep in a checked-out source tree (grep -R <pattern> .) This was easily applicable with CVS/RCS, but is hardly applicable with SVN, Git or mercurial - Certainly, this is nothing serious, nevertheless it's "nagging to loose a once applicable habit" > This doesn't count as "polluting the tree" in my mind. > It's certainly not as annoying as the "CVS" dirs that CVS puts all > over my tree. Does the name of the directory matter? Does the fact that CVS doesn't hide its directories make a difference? > Sure, the disk space is higher for a git clone than for a CVS > checkout, but with git you are getting the entire history of the > project instead of just one working copy as you do with CVS (or > Subversion) Well this doesn't scale well on big source trees (e.g. Fedora's) or one with a long history (e.g. GCC's). Just one figure: An SVN checkout (from GCC) # du -s -b gcc-4_3-branch 832684026 gcc-4_3-branch Size of an uncompressed tarball containing approximately the same sources (~ size of a hypothetical CVS checkout) # du -s -b gcc-4.3.2 369871768 gcc-4.3.2 Ralf -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
