Re: Git benchmark - comparison with Bazaar, Darcs, Git and Mercurial
- From
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
- Date
- Aug 2, 2007, 04:13 UTC
- Message-ID
- <alpine.LFD.0.999.0708012109040.3582@woody.linux-foundation.org>
- In-Reply-To
- <20070802040201.GI23484@lifeintegrity.com>
On Thu, 2 Aug 2007, Allan Wind wrote:
> > I would expect /something and file:///something to behave exactly the > same way (the latter just having bit extra syntax sugar).
I do agree that they should be basically the same, but from an implementation standpoint it actually makes a lot of sense to separate them. Also, there's actually a small amount of "logic" in it: the /something is obviously a "raw filename", while the "file:://something" clearly is something a lot more abstract.
I don't actually have a very strong opinion, but I do think that "file://" makes sense regardless (ie the patch I sent out is probably a good idea).
I also strongly dispute that "file://something" is _identical_ to just "something". There's a huge difference, as anybody who has ever tried to do
cp file://file-A file-B
will have hopefully found out. They may mean the same thing, but they have totally different levels of abstraction, so it does actually make some sense that you end up *cloning* the same thing, but different ways.
Linus