Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Git 2.12.0-rc0 Released With Various Improvements

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Git 2.12.0-rc0 Released With Various Improvements

    Phoronix: Git 2.12.0-rc0 Released With Various Improvements

    Coincidentally on the same day as Microsoft announcing the Git Virtual File-System, upstream Git developers have announced their first release candidate of the upcoming Git 2.12 milestone...

    Phoronix, Linux Hardware Reviews, Linux hardware benchmarks, Linux server benchmarks, Linux benchmarking, Desktop Linux, Linux performance, Open Source graphics, Linux How To, Ubuntu benchmarks, Ubuntu hardware, Phoronix Test Suite

  • #2
    Originally posted by phoronix View Post

    Great to see several updates regarding GitLFS, the Git Large File Storage project, an alternative approach to Microsoft's GVFS.
    Has it's purpose changed since release? LFS was meant for large files usually binary that you want to version but not add weight to the main repo(a reference is committed that points to a storage server to pull the file when checking out). Microsoft's approach differs from what I understood on the recent article, working similarly but on the actual git repo itself, those without GVFS on their system would still get heavy clones.

    Still seems like different goals targeting the entire git repo vs excluding large assets from the repo(that usually have no value in diffs) and only downloading the ones relevant to the checked out branch.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by polarathene View Post
      Has it's purpose changed since release? LFS was meant for large files usually binary that you want to version but not add weight to the main repo(a reference is committed that points to a storage server to pull the file when checking out). Microsoft's approach differs from what I understood on the recent article, working similarly but on the actual git repo itself, those without GVFS on their system would still get heavy clones.

      Still seems like different goals targeting the entire git repo vs excluding large assets from the repo(that usually have no value in diffs) and only downloading the ones relevant to the checked out branch.
      was gonna say the same sort of thing, but I am sure you have said it better!

      Comment


      • #4
        To me, there is a bigger problem than size with binary files in a Git repo: your inability to do merges on them.

        I really think that every binary format that you might want to track changes to should also have an equivalent text format. Then you can keep the text format as the source in the repo, and generate the binary version from that as part of the build process.

        Comment

        Working...
        X