On Tue, 2011-12-13 at 14:06 -0500, J. Bruce Fields wrote: > On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 01:22:06PM -0800, Toshio Kuratomi wrote: > > To some extent I agree with both sgallagh's sentiment and the logical > > conclusion you're drawing. However, I think the lookaside cache is > > a necessary optimization/compromise to the ideal of putting everything into > > version control, though. Current technology would make it prohibitive in > > terms of packager time (and for some packages, space on developer's > > machines) to put tarballs into git as the cloned repository would then > > contain every single new tarball the package ever had. > > I'd be curious to know how expensive that actually was. > > I'd think delta-compression could make it quite reasonable for the > typical project. (Exceptions including things like games with lots of > binary data in each release.)
Nearly all packages are released as a compressed tarball. So any change in the package is likely to result in a delta of the binary image that is close enough to 100% as makes no difference.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
-- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
