On Tue, 2008-09-30 at 17:37 -0400, Todd Zullinger wrote:
Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> SVN's major "con" is it being comparatively generous on local
> diskspace and it polluting a checked out source trees with huge
> amount of VCS-metadata files (git, mercurial do so as well).
Git and mercurial both keep their files in one top-level dir, e.g.
.git or .hg.
Try a recursive grep in a checked-out source tree (grep -R
<pattern> .)
This was easily applicable with CVS/RCS, but is hardly applicable with
SVN, Git or mercurial - Certainly, this is nothing serious, nevertheless
it's "nagging to loose a once applicable habit"
This doesn't count as "polluting the tree" in my
mind.
It's certainly not as annoying as the "CVS" dirs that CVS puts all
over my tree.
Does the name of the directory matter? Does the fact that CVS
doesn't
hide its directories make a difference?
Sure, the disk space is higher for a git clone than for a CVS
checkout, but with git you are getting the entire history of the
project instead of just one working copy as you do with CVS (or
Subversion)
Well this doesn't scale well on big source trees (e.g.
Fedora's)
or one with a long history (e.g. GCC's).
Just one figure:
An SVN checkout (from GCC)
# du -s -b gcc-4_3-branch
832684026 gcc-4_3-branch
Size of an uncompressed tarball containing approximately the same
sources (~ size of a hypothetical CVS checkout)
# du -s -b gcc-4.3.2
369871768 gcc-4.3.2
Ralf