4 ms·

> I found that adorable. You [Linux] have 45,000 files. Yeah, call me when your repo starts to get big. The Windows repo has over three million files. That Lin

by lev99 9y ago

> I found that adorable. You [Linux] have 45,000 files. Yeah, call me when your repo starts to get big. The Windows repo has over three million files. That Linux repo bashing at the end was very natsy. Yes the Windows git repo is larger than the Linux git repo. Windows also has a larger scope than the Linux kernel. If you want to dick wag please bring some performance benchmarks, not footprint benchmarks.

joshstrange 9y ago
Yeah I enjoyed the rest of the post but that part at the end left a bad taste in my mouth.
stordoff 9y ago
It seems weird to use file count as a measure of size -- what is the content of those files seems more important. Moreover, is it even a good thing? 3m files _could_ (doesn't necessarily) indicate it's poorly structured/intractable. All round it just seems like a weird/unnecessary comparison to make. Edit: missed "indicate".
- gargravarr 9y ago
  The last I heard, MS imported the entire Windows history into Git. It resulted in a repo of over 300GB. To deal with this (imagine the fresh clone times...) they built a virtual filesystem on top of Git.[0] We all know Windows is quite a mess, and many of those files will be for esoteric legacy compatibility reasons. At the same time, they've certainly done a good job of stress-testing Git! [0]https://techcrunch.com/2017/05/24/microsoft-now-uses-git-and-gvfs-to-develop-windows/ https://techcrunch.com/2017/05/24/microsoft-now-uses-git-and...
gargravarr 9y ago
Agreed. If they want to get into a p*ssing contest, they ought to consider they're comparing their entire OS to just the kernel. Let's pick any one distro and I bet they'll be eating their words. Then consider everything that counts as 'Linux' and I bet the daily commit count would result in Windows' development being classed as a 'critical network outage'.
- soneil 9y ago
  I read it as a pretty fair comparison within the context. They're not comparing windows vs linux. They're comparing the challenges their repo faces vs the challenges the linux kernel repo faces. And within that context, I really hope the windows repo is substantially larger, else the linux kernel is going very very wrong.
  - gargravarr 9y ago
    It was a fair comparison until they started using words like 'cute', mocking the average commits per day and challenging the kernel team on size - that's when it got unnecessarily nasty. Almost condescending, Microsoft telling the guys who wrote git for their own use that they don't know how to run it.
kerkeslager 9y ago
"Measuring programming progress by lines of code is like measuring aircraft building progress by weight." --Bill Gates
trisimix 9y ago
Yeah your OS is 60 times bigger and it still has to get dragged down by business models. Nix was literally invented to be small thats why we have kernel panics. Still I'd love to get a carbon copy of the windows source. Could you imagine the power...
dmurray 9y ago
I don't think the author is being nasty. He's comparing the Linux kernel to Windows on the axes that are relevant here: number of files in a single repo, and number of commits per day.
pwinnski 9y ago
The author has a clarification, but even before reading that, I didn't think the author was mocking Linux at all, just the person who tried to use the Linux repo has an example of a high-volume project. Linux itself is both better and more important than any repo on which I'm likely to ever work, but their centralized points of control mean that I've worked on multiple repos with a higher commit-rate. It's not a great example of stress-testing an SCM product.

by lev99 9y ago

joshstrange 9y ago

Yeah I enjoyed the rest of the post but that part at the end left a bad taste in my mouth.

stordoff 9y ago

It seems weird to use file count as a measure of size -- what is the content of those files seems more important. Moreover, is it even a good thing? 3m files _could_ (doesn't necessarily) indicate it's poorly structured/intractable. All round it just seems like a weird/unnecessary comparison to make. Edit: missed "indicate".

gargravarr 9y ago
The last I heard, MS imported the entire Windows history into Git. It resulted in a repo of over 300GB. To deal with this (imagine the fresh clone times...) they built a virtual filesystem on top of Git.[0] We all know Windows is quite a mess, and many of those files will be for esoteric legacy compatibility reasons. At the same time, they've certainly done a good job of stress-testing Git! [0]https://techcrunch.com/2017/05/24/microsoft-now-uses-git-and-gvfs-to-develop-windows/ https://techcrunch.com/2017/05/24/microsoft-now-uses-git-and...

gargravarr 9y ago

Agreed. If they want to get into a p*ssing contest, they ought to consider they're comparing their entire OS to just the kernel. Let's pick any one distro and I bet they'll be eating their words. Then consider everything that counts as 'Linux' and I bet the daily commit count would result in Windows' development being classed as a 'critical network outage'.

soneil 9y ago
I read it as a pretty fair comparison within the context. They're not comparing windows vs linux. They're comparing the challenges their repo faces vs the challenges the linux kernel repo faces. And within that context, I really hope the windows repo is substantially larger, else the linux kernel is going very very wrong.
- gargravarr 9y ago
  It was a fair comparison until they started using words like 'cute', mocking the average commits per day and challenging the kernel team on size - that's when it got unnecessarily nasty. Almost condescending, Microsoft telling the guys who wrote git for their own use that they don't know how to run it.

kerkeslager 9y ago

"Measuring programming progress by lines of code is like measuring aircraft building progress by weight." --Bill Gates

trisimix 9y ago

Yeah your OS is 60 times bigger and it still has to get dragged down by business models. Nix was literally invented to be small thats why we have kernel panics. Still I'd love to get a carbon copy of the windows source. Could you imagine the power...

dmurray 9y ago

I don't think the author is being nasty. He's comparing the Linux kernel to Windows on the axes that are relevant here: number of files in a single repo, and number of commits per day.

pwinnski 9y ago

The author has a clarification, but even before reading that, I didn't think the author was mocking Linux at all, just the person who tried to use the Linux repo has an example of a high-volume project. Linux itself is both better and more important than any repo on which I'm likely to ever work, but their centralized points of control mean that I've worked on multiple repos with a higher commit-rate. It's not a great example of stress-testing an SCM product.