RE: Git vs Monotone
- From
- Craig L. Ching <cching@mqsoftware.com>
- Date
- Jul 31, 2008, 19:28 UTC
- Message-ID
- <63BEA5E623E09F4D92233FB12A9F79430238A5EC@emailmn.mqsoftware.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <alpine.LFD.1.10.0807311211260.3277@nehalem.linux-foundation.org>
Show 13 quoted lines
> [mailto:git-owner@vger.kernel.org] On Behalf Of Linus Torvalds > Sent: Thursday, July 31, 2008 2:18 PM > Subject: Re: Git vs Monotone > > On Thu, 31 Jul 2008, Sverre Rabbelier wrote: > > > The guy is apparently happy using a single database for > monotone (which apparently has a database that is two times > the size of the git one), but then doesn't want to use a > single database for git, but wants to force a full clone for > each. Not to mention that in git, you'd normally not do 11 > clones to begin with, you'd just do 11 branches in one repo. >
Having come from monotone to git recently, I have to say that it isn't immediately obvious how you get the single database for git a la monotone (with remotes that point to the right place, etc.). At first, I also thought that you didn't share the object database on clones and I had to discover that myself. It's possible that I'm just an idiot too ;-)
> So there is no point discussing things with people like that. > If he wants to skew things in monotone's favor, he can do it. > Let him. >
It's possible he's doing that, but it's also possible he just isn't that familiar with git.
> Linus > --
Cheers, Craig