4 ms·
Having read plenty of version control system logs from around the turn of the millennium (i.e. when things were _far_ less crazy than 1987), I'd wager most of i
by Sesse__ 3y ago
Having read plenty of version control system logs from around the turn of the millennium (i.e. when things were _far_ less crazy than 1987), I'd wager most of it would come in the form of commits marked “implemented EGA driver, faster AI in Reversi, improve FPU exception code”, aka “I'm done for today, committing”.
- kelnos 3y agoWhich makes sense, in a way. Most (all?) of the popular version control systems back then were centralized, and required the central server to even make a commit. Even Subversion, a "better CVS", required this. When you have to wait several seconds (or more) to make a commit, and you couldn't edit things to tidy up history after the fact, you tended to make commits much less often. I kinda take git for granted now, where commits happen in a fraction of a second. Sometimes it's hard to remember what a pain it was using CVS, and even SVN.