gt; >
> > I think that this would be The Wrong Thing to do.
Agreed, but probably for a different reason.
> I'm merely pointing out that if you have the use-case Derek Fawcus
> describes you can get per-file mtimes via something similar to the the
> hook method Theodore Ts
On Mon, Feb 19, 2018 at 10:22:36PM +0100, Peter Backes wrote:
>
> It is pretty annoying that git cannot, even if I know what I am doing,
> and explicitly want it to, preserve the modification time.
The use case I've come across where it would be of value is for code
archeology, either importing
On Fri, Apr 15, 2005 at 02:45:55PM -0400, C. Scott Ananian wrote:
> > - we already have wasted space due to the low-level filesystem (as
> > opposed to "git") usually being block-based, which means that space
> > utilization for small objects tends to suck. So you really want to
> > prefer ob
On Fri, Apr 15, 2005 at 01:19:30PM -0400, C. Scott Ananian wrote:
> Why are blobs per-file? [After all, Linus insists that files are an
> illusion.] Why not just have 'chunks', and assemble *these*
> into blobs (read, 'files')? A good chunk size would fit evenly into some
> number of disk blo
4 matches
Mail list logo
