From: Eric Montellese Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 22:00:47 GMT Subject: Re: Fwd: Git and Large Binaries: A Proposed Solution Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <201101211436.32033.wjl@icecavern.net> Thanks Wesely, I did take a look at git annex -- it looks to me as though that project is more of a special-case, allowing users to use git to track things like music and movies. While it's possible this might be usable for the use case I described, what I'm really looking for is a true extension of git which allows binaries to be treated differently (if the user desires) when using git as a source management tool. The major difference I see with git-annex is that the user must specifically tell git-annex to download certain files. Instead, I want the user to always automatically have *all* of the files (both source and binaries) for the current revision -- but not necessarily for hundreds (thousands?) of past revisions (which as git is implemented currently would take up many gigabytes) git-annex does look like a neat piece of software, but I don't think it quite fits here -- thank you again for the comment though! Eric On Fri, Jan 21, 2011 at 4:36 PM, Wesley J. Landaker wrote: > On Friday, January 21, 2011 11:57:21 Eric Montellese wrote: >> To whet your appetite to read all of the below (I know it's long), >> this is the root of the solution: >> >> ---       Don't track binaries in git.  Track their hashes.       --- > > Comment from the peanut gallery: > > I haven't read your approach in great detail, but just in case you are not > aware, there is a project call git-annex > by Joey Hess that I believe takes a similar approach. > > Since you've obviously given this a lot of thought, you might want to take a > peek at that and see if it already does what you want, or if your proposal > does something significantly different/better. >