3 ms·
a DVCS that can handle enterprise requirements, very interesting. But let's see how it compares to git/hg/bzr in a week :) The pluggable storage layers sounds l
by kilian 16y ago
a DVCS that can handle enterprise requirements, very interesting. But let's see how it compares to git/hg/bzr in a week :) The pluggable storage layers sounds like something I would use in my company.
- swilliams 16y agoAgreed. From the description, it sounds like it would be best marketed to enterprise and bigger businesses. Kind of like how they encourage SourceSafe users to migrate to Vault, they could work on migrating TFS/ClearCase users to Veracity. I think if they aimed it at a git/hg/bzr replacement for OSS projects, they'd fail mightily. Either way, they have their work cut out for them.
- cdawzrd 16y agoWell, I guess it depends on how they implement the "database versioning", but if I had a DVCS that would version a sqlite database inside a file (merge support, all the trimmings) in addition to the code surrounding that file, I'd switch away from git/svn in an instant.
- jackowayed 16y agoI bet pluggable storage layers would be really useful for building something like GitHub. Start with one of the builtin storage layers, and if scale puts strain on that, write a better storage layer. GitHub more-or-less did that when they switched off of Engine Yard (where they were using GFS), but they had to roll their own with RPC calls. That also meant that they had to change Grit, their Ruby git library, to split stuff that had to get executed on the fileservers (where the actual repos are stored) and stuff that can be executed on the server that wanted the information. With pluggable storage layers, they could have changed how they stored the repos without changing their bindings at all.