4 ms·
These systems were designed for a hierarchical filesystem so it is natural that that is what they support. I'm sure that if tag-based filesystems were the defau
by kevincox 5y ago
These systems were designed for a hierarchical filesystem so it is natural that that is what they support. I'm sure that if tag-based filesystems were the default they would have an equally suitable design that worked well there. This could be as simple as specifying the "project" as a set of tags. For example project=camera and maybe compile a submodule with project=camera,module=ui. Then the files inside could be processed by the build tool.
Of course for any tag-based filesystem to take over it will probably need a compatibility mode. I can imagine something simple as a path=myproj/src/main.rs.
- humanrebar 5y agoMy point wasn't that it would be impossible to create a new kind of solution. It's enough that it would be a massive undertaking for unclear benefit, if any. If we get rid of hierarchical filesystems, what replaces got, for instance? Perforce has some ability to project different filesystem hierarchies, but even if that were enough (it probably isn't), porting all those tools and projects to perforce would be an incredible amount of work without a clear upside for users of version control systems.
- EleanorKonik 5y agoThis is the piece I've been struggling to get at. I understand why filesystems exist and how they help with interacting with the physical structures that underlie computers, but I don't understand what benefit a database alternative to directories can offer (and if you tell me a directory is just a specialized database please be prepared to explain using very clear language). Maybe there is one, but even when I talk to experienced devs with engineering (not just software) backgrounds, I haven't gotten a good explanation. Perhaps because there isn't one? But I've been curious about this for weeks.