3 ms·

Yep. It is kind of amusing how tracking history has evolved over the years. We started out with an initial version (of a file) and then tracking the changes s

Yep. It is kind of amusing how tracking history has evolved over the years. We started out with an initial version (of a file) and then tracking the changes since the beginning. One of the major innovations with RCS was to track changes in reverse time, so that the latest version of the file was quickly accessible. And with git and other DVCS, we're back to forward-time tracking of changes, but now with snapshots along the way to easily produce the current version on a branch. While it's amusing to see someone still working on it, for new projects, if I was interested in not using git, I'd likely go for fossil just because it integrates many other useful tools like issue tracking. It is unfortunate that an integrated issue tracking never seemed to get widespread adoption in the git world.

jimktrains2 8y ago
Git doesn't store deltas, it stores the whole object for each version of the file.
- wolfgang42 8y ago
  In theory, Git doesn't store deltas. In practice, it uses packfiles which store some objects as diffs against other objects. (As I understand it, though, it doesn't do this strictly by time, it has some heuristics to find the most similar other object which may pick completely unrelated objects if they're similar enough.)
  - jimktrains2 8y ago
    My understanding is that that's an optimization for space and only used for much older commits. Pack files aren't needed in or present in every repository. They're more an archive than part of everyday usage is my understanding.