| |||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
What do LWN-ers use ?What do LWN-ers use ?Posted Mar 16, 2008 18:49 UTC (Sun) by astrophoenix (guest, #13528)In reply to: What do LWN-ers use ? by johill Parent article: Emacs chooses Bazaar interesting. I can tell you that when you do keep the full history around, mercurial is a lot more space-efficient than git. and if you are making a new copy of a tree on the same filesystem, mercurial hard-links everything, so it's still cheap.
(Log in to post comments)
What do LWN-ers use ? Posted Mar 17, 2008 4:10 UTC (Mon) by dlang (✭ supporter ✭, #313) [Link] git has the option to use hard links when doing a clone. I've also seen some very spectacular compression achieved with git packs. are you possibly comparing to a git repository that hasn't been packed?
What do LWN-ers use ? Posted Mar 19, 2008 20:36 UTC (Wed) by astrophoenix (guest, #13528) [Link] you're probably correct; I was probably comparing an unpacked git repo to a mercurial repo when I said mercurial took less space.
|
|
||||||||||||