On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 11:32, Greg Stein <gst...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Mar 23, 2012 5:59 AM, "Ben Smith-Mannschott" <bsmith.o...@gmail.com> > wrote: >> >> On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 10:22, Ashod Nakashian <ashodnakash...@yahoo.com> >> wrote: >>... > >> > Now, does this justify the cost of a new file-format? That's reasonable >> > to argue. My take is that the proposed file-format is simple enough and the >> > gains (especially on large projects with many branches/tags checked) should >> > justify this overhead. >> >> It seems to me that these are the same issues that drove the design of >> git's repository format, where individual items are first stored >> individually gzipped (loose) and then periodically combined into >> efficient pack files to save additional space and file system >> overhead. >> >> Why invent a new format, when one exists that could serve? > > Please read Ash's document. He already considered and covered the git pack > file format.
thanks. my bad.
