Am Freitag, 6. November 2009 21:51:08 schrieb olafbuddenha...@gmx.net: > > As far as I know they didn't have atomic commits back then - am I > > right in that?
What I mean is if they tried to version single files (like cvs) or just the filesystem state (like Mercurial / Git / ...). > > How exactly do they differ from a normal file system with a > > Mercurial/Git backend for revisioning with a time-based commit > > schedule? > > Well, moving stuff between the main store for the "live" files and some > VCS backend for the revisions is complex and inefficient... But aside > from such technical details, there is probably no difference. Which is > just what I said one or two mails ago :-) OK :) So the difference would just be efficiency/going back. Best wishes, Arne
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
