[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Arch Versus CVS Versus Subversoin

From: Andrew Suffield
Subject: Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Arch Versus CVS Versus Subversoin
Date: Mon, 6 Dec 2004 02:29:17 +0000
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.6+20040907i

On Sun, Dec 05, 2004 at 08:25:07PM -0600, John A Meinel wrote:
> *However* the original poster was asking if we do "binary diff like 
> Subversion", and SVN's claim to fame is that they do delta compression 
> on binary files.
> So when you responded with "yes we do, it works perfectly the same as 
> SVN." You were incorrect.

No, it does work just as well (and better) than svn.

> Actually, as far as stating that it should be called delta compression 
> instead of binary diff goes against what I would consider the popular 
> terminology.

You mean 'svn propaganda', not 'popular terminology'. Of *course*
their propaganda tries to confuse the terminology. Confusing users is
how marketing works.

  .''`.  ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
 : :' : |
 `. `'                          |
   `-             -><-          |

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]