191–200 of 287 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Piper is not built on top of Mercurial.
Sorry, you are right, I got it confused with some other work Google was doing to improve the scalability of mercurial. It's not based on perforce though either, appears to be entirely custom technology.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I still think we need something better than Git, though. It brought some very cool ideas and the inner workings are reasonably understandable, but the UI is atrociously complicated. And yes, dealing with large files is a very sore point. Note that Google and Facebook ran into the same problems Microsoft did, and their solution was to use Mercurial and build similar systems on top of it. Microsoft could've done that…
> Microsoft could've done that too, but instead decided to improve Git, They didn't improve git, they only made this for themselves and for their product users. Git doesn't restrict you to a single operating system.
Given Microsoft's recent form, I'd expect this to appear on Linux before long, and possibly osx too. In any case, it's open source so you could always port it yourself.
> when you run “git checkout” and it takes up to 3 hours, or even a simple “git status” takes almost 10 minutes to run. That’s assuming you can get past the “git clone”, which takes 12+ hours. How on Earth can anybody work like that? I'd have thought you may as well ditch git at that point, since nobody's going to be using it as a tool, surely? git commit -m 'Add today\'s work - night all!' && git push; shutdown
How on Earth can anybody work like that? Since it's look like they are still migrating I don't think a lot of people actually did work like that. Maybe just a couple of times to figure out how long it would actually take. Or maybe those who really use it are actually doing shallow clones which would probably take much less time. Actually shallow clone is nice but doesn't seem to be known very well. I use it often if…
Okay, so this is a networking issue. Or is it a stick everything in the same branch issue?
Whatever the reason here the issue is pure size vs. network pipe, pure and simple. Hum, when can I get a laptop with a 10GBaseT interface?
One of the issue with the way they are doing this (only grab files when needed) is you cannot really work offline anymore.
This is similar to what Google uses internally. See http://cacm.acm.org/magazines/2016/7/204032-why-google-store... : "Most developers access Piper through a system called Clients in the Cloud, or CitC, which consists of a cloud-based storage backend and a Linux-only FUSE13 file system. Developers see their workspaces as directories in the file system, including their changes overlaid on top of the full Piper reposit…
Google's dev infra is pretty amazing and it's at least a decade ahead of anything else I've seen. Every single ex-Googler misses it quite a bit.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Microsoft could've done that too, but instead decided to improve Git, They didn't improve git, they only made this for themselves and for their product users. Git doesn't restrict you to a single operating system.
> They didn't improve git, they only made this for themselves and for their product users. Git doesn't restrict you to a single operating system. Given Microsoft's recent form, I'd expect this to appear on Linux before long, and possibly osx too. In any case, it's open source so you could always port it yourself.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think Joey Hess' attempt at "solving the problem" deserves a mention. It is open source (GPLV3) licensed. [not proprietary] Written in Haskell. [cool aid] Currently has 1200+ stars on Github and is part of at least Ubuntu ( http://packages.ubuntu.com/search?keywords=git-annex ) since 12.04. [shows something for support and adoption] edit: Link to Github https://github.com/joeyh/git-annex -- thanks dgellow
There's a small but important trap to people who might want to use git-annex as a backup tool, namely that you can't store a git repo in git-annex. http://git-annex.branchable.com/forum/Storing_git_repos_in_g...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The reddit thread has quite a few people with opposing opinions, fwiw. Mostly "stuff that's ~instant on unix takes many seconds on Windows" and the like. It's true that Microsoft has contributed a lot (to the benefit of all), but from what I'm seeing it sounds like it's still lagging quite a bit. I haven't touched Windows in quite a while, so I can't really make a claim either way.
I'm at least speaking from daily use in my anecdotes. Apples for apples, yes Windows is going to lag behind Linux. [1] That doesn't mean it isn't fast and stable from the perspective of day-to-day Windows usage, and definitely as I stated in the previous comment, it is much faster and more stable on Windows today compared to Windows a few years ago. Several of the anecdotes on the reddit thread don't even seem to tak…
And "years behind on their git version" is I think the norm for git users :) I pretty regularly have to recommend that coworkers / etc upgrade from git 1.7 (or 1.8 or something similar) to an even-remotely-modern version.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Microsoft could've done that too, but instead decided to improve Git, They didn't improve git, they only made this for themselves and for their product users. Git doesn't restrict you to a single operating system.
> They didn't improve git, they only made this for themselves and for their product users. Git doesn't restrict you to a single operating system. Given Microsoft's recent form, I'd expect this to appear on Linux before long, and possibly osx too. In any case, it's open source so you could always port it yourself.
Of course, but that would be me, and not Microsoft, who's improving git ;-)