Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Mon, 11 Feb 2002 22:59:35 -0500 | From | Theodore Tso <> | Subject | Re: linux-2.5.4-pre1 - bitkeeper testing |
| |
On Mon, Feb 11, 2002 at 09:17:43PM -0800, Tom Lord wrote: > > It may be theoretically interesting to minimize the space taken up by > revisions, but I think it is more economically sensible to screw that > and and instead, maximize convenience and interactive speed with > features like revision libraries (as in arch). This ain't the early > 90's any more.
For What It's Worth, on a laptop environment (where I work quite a bit) and for something the size of the Linux kernel, and where things change at the speed of the Linux kernel, in fact space efficiency matters a lot.
In fact, the one thing for which I was quite unhappy with BK until Larry implemented bk lclone (aka bk clone -l) was the amount of space having multiple copies of the same repository took up, since BK really requires multiple sandboxes for parallel development. It's not a big deal with something the size of e2fsprogs, but for something the size of the BK linux tree, Size Really Matters.
- Ted - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
|  |