Re: [Gnu-arch-users] GNU Arch 2.0 -- first source

[Bruce Stephens]

Thomas Lord <address@hidden> writes:

[...]

> Other good hints are monotone and git -- we crossed the line at
> which sub-file delta-compression ceases to be important in the
> common cases some time ago.

I don't know about git, but I believe monotone still stores
xdelta-like deltas at least some of the time.  (I've no idea whether
this is a good or bad thing.  Maybe it's good for monotone but not
worthwhile in general because of characteristics of sqlite.)  

I think I'd argue that particular properties of the deltas and the way
they were packed (in gzipped tarballs) hurt Arch 1.*, rather than some
abstract notion of deltas.

However, it seems quite likely that it's too much complexity to be
worth bothering with.  It sounds like the new archive format can
eliminate revision libraries, and I'd guess most people are working
nowadays with revision libraries, so that all sounds like a win over
Arch 1.*.