On Mon, 2 May 2005, Matt Mackall wrote: > > It's still simple in Mercurial, but more importantly Mercurial _won't > need it_. Dropping history is a work-around, not a feature. Side note: this is what Larry thought about BK too. Until three years had passed, and the ChangeSet file was many megabytes in size. Even slow growth ends up being big growth in the end.. We had been talking about pruning the BK history as long back as a year ago. Linus - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Mercurial 0.4b vs git patchbomb benchmark
- From: Chris Wedgwood <[email protected]>
- Re: Mercurial 0.4b vs git patchbomb benchmark
- From: Matt Mackall <[email protected]>
- Re: Mercurial 0.4b vs git patchbomb benchmark
- References:
- Re: Mercurial 0.4b vs git patchbomb benchmark
- From: Matt Mackall <[email protected]>
- Re: Mercurial 0.4b vs git patchbomb benchmark
- From: Bill Davidsen <[email protected]>
- Re: Mercurial 0.4b vs git patchbomb benchmark
- From: Linus Torvalds <[email protected]>
- Re: Mercurial 0.4b vs git patchbomb benchmark
- From: Matt Mackall <[email protected]>
- Re: Mercurial 0.4b vs git patchbomb benchmark
- From: Linus Torvalds <[email protected]>
- Re: Mercurial 0.4b vs git patchbomb benchmark
- From: Matt Mackall <[email protected]>
- Re: Mercurial 0.4b vs git patchbomb benchmark
- Prev by Date: Re: Empty partition nodes not created (was device node issues with recent mm's and udev)
- Next by Date: Re: Mercurial 0.4b vs git patchbomb benchmark
- Previous by thread: Re: Mercurial 0.4b vs git patchbomb benchmark
- Next by thread: Re: Mercurial 0.4b vs git patchbomb benchmark
- Index(es):
 |