Doug Lee wrote: > It was mentioned on another thread that CVS stores the HEAD revision > in its entirety, older trunk revisions as backward deltas from the > HEAD, and branches as forward deltas from the branch point. > > If I read this right, a common case will take a lot more space than I > thought. My current project is an example: I was just asked to go > back and apply some current features to an old revision of a set of > files. When I did that, I put in as much of the current code as I > could without allowing any code to go in that could have side effects > outside those intended. Some files I could literally copy from the > HEAD revision (though I did it via the appropriate merge commands); > others came close but not quite there, and of course still others > remain very different from the head of the trunk. > > But I think what people are saying is that a copy of the head of > the trunk, when placed on a branch, will basically create a > reverse-duplicate set of deltas (perhaps condensed into a smaller > number of them of course) to the set between the head of the trunk > and the branch point.
Correct. > Somehow I'd been assuming that CVS would > maybe notice that the head of my branch and the head of the trunk > produced identical contents for some files and might only store one > copy. > > I don't yet know enough about the RCS file format, but I wonder if the > format itself would support deltas forming a different graph than is > currently formed, to optimize file size and/or number of deltas from > point to point. No, not without changing it so much it would essentially be an entirely new and different format. Max. _______________________________________________ Info-cvs mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/info-cvs
