Re: [RFC] Zit: the git-based single file content tracker

From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Oct 24, 2008, 18:28 UTC
Message-ID: <7vabct3l1e.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org>
In-Reply-To: <m38wsei8ne.fsf@localhost.localdomain>

Jakub Narebski <jnareb@gmail.com> writes:

Show 16 quoted lines

> "Giuseppe Bilotta" <giuseppe.bilotta@gmail.com> writes:
>> On Fri, Oct 24, 2008 at 1:23 AM, Jean-Luc Herren <jlh@gmx.ch> wrote:
>
>> > If you decide against a shared repository, maybe you want to
>> > consider to not use ".zit.file/", but ".zit/file/" as the
>> > repository?  This would reduce the clutter to a single directory,
>> > just like with ".git".  And moving files around wouldn't be that
>> > much complicated.
>> 
>> Right. I'll give that a shot.
>
> By the way RCS which I use for version control of single files use
> both approaches: it can store 'file,v' alongside 'file' (just like
> your '.zit.file/' or '.file.git/'), but it can also store files on
> per-directory basis in 'RCS/' subdirectory (proposed '.zit/file/' or
> '.zit/file.git/' solution)

I am not opposed to the wish to track a single file (but I have to say I am not personally in need for such a feature), but I have to wonder from the technical point of view if one-repo-per-file is the right approach.

Running "git init" in an empty directory consumes about 100k of diskspace on the machine I am typing this on, and you should be able to share most of them (except one 41-byte file that is the branch tip ref) when you track many files inside a single directory by using a single repository, one branch per file (or "one set of branches per file") model.