5 ms·
Maybe file management will map closer to revision control one day. Autosave would be the equivalent of a regular commit, closing the document would be a tagged
by oneeyedpigeon 5y ago
Maybe file management will map closer to revision control one day. Autosave would be the equivalent of a regular commit, closing the document would be a tagged commit of some sort. Your "hitting undo until returning to last saved state" would then be a single step, reverting to a timed, possibly named point.
- dylan604 5y agoFor text based files, I think a versioning like system built into the filesystem would be ideal. Each save is just the diff. A nice UI to see/revert changes. Yet the lack of commit type messages would make those changes less friendly. I don't want to be burdened/slowed down with commit messages everytime I hit Cmd-S. However, this would not work for binary type files like MOV, PSD, etc.
- leohonexus 5y agoAh, this reminds me of YesterCode, a tool that lets you scrub through code changes like a timeline. Relevant HN thread: https://web.eecs.utk.edu/~azh/blog/yestercode.html https://web.eecs.utk.edu/~azh/blog/yestercode.html
- chongli 5y agoStoring diffs is not a great idea since then it requires that you apply them all to get the latest version. Notably, git does not store files as diffs [1] which is one of the reasons it’s so much faster than older diff-based VCSes. [1] https://stackoverflow.com/a/43364484 https://stackoverflow.com/a/43364484