gerhard.oettl.ml@xxxxxxxxxxx writes: > Benoit Sigoure schrieb: >> On Nov 19, 2007, at 1:56 PM, Matthieu Moy wrote: > >> I think this is irrelevant to the question he asked. >> >> Now I think that the fact that SVN does "lightweight" copies by >> recording that such modification was in fact an `svn cp' / `svn mv' >> isn't important for git-svn, because the data end up in the Git >> repository which handles copies and moves much much better than SVN >> does. > > I hoped this and it was one of the motivations for looking at git ;-) > > But why is so much traffic necessary to transfer data that is > already _complete_ present in the local git repository? Is it? What is the right behavior when the file has been changed within the git repository (after all, we are rebasing and not tracking the svn archive)? While I would probably prefer getting a copy from the changed file rather than the original one, the matter does not seem completely trivial in its implications. > Traffic that seams not to be necessary when using the "not so good" > svn. It is not a git problem (git has good packing properties) but rather a git-svn issue. So don't blame git in general. -- David Kastrup - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
