[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Gnu-arch-users] [BUG] binary files
From: |
Tom Lord |
Subject: |
[Gnu-arch-users] [BUG] binary files |
Date: |
Tue, 15 Jun 2004 16:51:32 -0700 (PDT) |
> From: Matthieu Moy <address@hidden>
> There's something I don't understand. No one would reasonably propose
> a revision control system storing full copies for source ASCII files
> today. You could *off course* store a full copy for source files too.
> You would have merging algorithms, usually more effective than just
> storing the patch in the archive. That is clearly the *wrong*
> solution. How is that different from binary files?
Because a text diff is useful even if you don't have a copy of either
the ORIG or MOD that was used to create it. A binary diff isn't.
The situation of not having the ORIG or MOD is common in arch and
coping with it is one of the primary things that arch _does_ that make
it a revision control system.
What would you think of something like the following:
1. The archive format could be expanded so that revisions with
changesets could optionally also contain "exact changesets".
A revision might have:
patch-5.patch.tar.gz: the ordinary changeset with
binary full-texts
patch-5.exact.tar.gz: the same changeset but xdelta
bniary diffs, etc.
2. The builder can use .exact changesets if they are present.
Replay and update can gain an option to use .exact changesets.
3. commit should have an option to store only a .exact changeset
If a revision lacks a .patch and has only .exact, commands that
need .patch should signal an error and treat it as an unreadable
revision.
4. a new command, `tla fill-in-exact REVISION' should have two
options:
--exact (the default)
Add a .exact changeset to a revision that already
has a .patch changeset if the .exact changeset would
be smaller.
--full
Add a .patch changeset to a revision that already
has a .exact changeset if the revision
lacks a .patch changeset.
5. push-mirror should have an option to not include .patch
changesets from revisions with .exact ones, and the opposite
option, and an option to go back and get the missing ones.
That should solve everyone's issues with binary files. People over
small pipes can commit .exact and hopefully usually read .exact
into their local mirrors. Anyone server side and clients on the
opposite side of the server can fill in missing .patch files
themselves.
-t
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Some issues, (continued)
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Some issues, Sriram Ramkrishna, 2004/06/09
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Some issues, Tom Lord, 2004/06/14
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Some issues, Michael Poole, 2004/06/14
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Some issues, Matthieu Moy, 2004/06/15
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Some issues (why no bdiff for Arch), James Blackwell, 2004/06/15
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Some issues (why no bdiff for Arch), Matthieu Moy, 2004/06/16
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Some issues (why no bdiff for Arch), James Blackwell, 2004/06/18
- [Gnu-arch-users] [BUG] binary files,
Tom Lord <=
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] [BUG] binary files, Matthieu Moy, 2004/06/16
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] [BUG] binary files, Bug Goo, 2004/06/16
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Some issues, Tom Lord, 2004/06/15
Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Some issues, Aaron Bentley, 2004/06/09
Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Some issues, Milan Cvetkovic, 2004/06/09