11–17 of 17 posts
The source code itself was moved to Subversion (via RCS and CVS) long ago, and later to Git, but the configuration files continue to be tracked using SCCS.
There is an open source implementation of SCCS called GNU CSSC: https://www.gnu.org/software/cssc/
I have seen Larry make similar claims about the weave format vs. patch-based format many times, and he has also put git firmly in the "patch-based" camp, but I believe the only real effect to git not using a weave is increased time-complexity of "blame" operations.
1. Git has constant time access any version of a file as well; the --depth option to the pack algorithm places a constant (but configurable) upper bound on the number of deltas that will need to be applied whenever fetching a blob. Intuitively, it would seem to me that for files with extremely large numbers of changes, this could be faster than extracting the weave, potentially at reduced space efficiency.
2. Merges are separate from the commits that effect the change; the lm/clem example in TFA would work as expected on git. Merge commits will only show up in the annotation if there were conflicts.
We still use SCCS at the investment firm I work at, to track configuration file change history. The source code itself was moved to Subversion (via RCS and CVS) long ago, and later to Git, but the configuration files continue to be tracked using SCCS. There is an open source implementation of SCCS called GNU CSSC: https://www.gnu.org/software/cssc/
I finally found out the probelem, which was part sccs and part xenix.
xenix had shorter filenames, so while checking filename.c into SCCS gave s.filename.c, checking longfilename.c into sccs gave s.longfilename and checking it out lost the .c extension and make wouldn't compile it.
We still use SCCS at the investment firm I work at, to track configuration file change history. The source code itself was moved to Subversion (via RCS and CVS) long ago, and later to Git, but the configuration files continue to be tracked using SCCS. There is an open source implementation of SCCS called GNU CSSC: https://www.gnu.org/software/cssc/
How come? What keeps you on it?
We could migrate it all to Git, but unlike with source code, we do not branch or merge config, and there are no clear benefits to a migration to justify the effort and the risk.
For those that don't know, Larry was the author of BitKeeper and when he changed the license for it, it prompted Linus to write Git. Guessing if he had never done that, we'd all be using BitKeeper now and Git wouldn't exist.
And Marc Rochkind (the OP) wrote SCCS, as well as one of the more seminal Unix programming books and a ton of other notable achievements. Looking through the rest of the archive, nice to see that Larry has gone into retirement but makes time away from fishing to continue to tell us how fucking smart he is and how stupid everyone else is. Never change, Larry.