Tom Lane wrote:
Mark Mielke <m...@mark.mielke.cc> writes:
I'm not following. CVS and SVN both kept such directories "in the
checked out copy." Recall the CSV/*,v files?
I can't speak to SVN, but that is *not* how CVS does it. There's a
small CVS/ directory, but the repository (with all the ,v files)
is somewhere else. In particular I can have N different checked-out
working copies without duplicating the repository.
Ah - my mistake. It's been too long since I used CVS. CVS keeps the
metadata describing what you have, but not the 'pristine copy' that SVN
keeps.
I just don't understand why you care. If the CVS directories didn't bug
you before, why does the single .git directory bug you now?
(1) size (ok, not a showstopper)
(2) potential for error
Blowing away your working directory shouldn't result in loss of your
entire project history
Perhaps you could describe the 'blowing away your working directory
shouldn't result in loss of your entire project history'?
Yes, if that's the only copy you have - this is true. But, you would
normally have at least one copy, and everybody else will also have a
copy. Linus has joked about not needing backups, since he can recover
his entire project history from places all over the Internet.
As a "for example", you could have a local repo that you publish from.
Your work spaces could be from that local repo. Others pull from your
local repo.
For a small project I have, I keep the SVN / centralized model. People
upload their changes with 'git push', and pick up updates with 'git
pull' ('cvs update'). Whatever works best for you - but it's all
available. Just because your workspace happens to have a copy of your
entire project history doesn't necessarily mean that blowing away your
working directory results in loss of your entire project history. Think
multiple redundant copies. It's a feature - not a problem. :-)
Cheers,
mark
--
Mark Mielke <m...@mielke.cc>
