[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: Xdelta and CVS

From: Eric Siegerman
Subject: Re: Xdelta and CVS
Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2001 19:44:02 -0400
User-agent: Mutt/1.2.5i

On Thu, Apr 19, 2001 at 03:47:14PM -0500, David H. Thornley wrote:
> (How rapid [-ly an xdelta-capable CVS was accepted
> by the world at large]
> depends partly on how effective the
> merging was, which is to say whether two changes in a file
> can be merged to produce another useful file.

It would be exactly as effective as it is now (ie. good for text,
useless for binary).  The merge algorithm is completely
orthogonal to the storage format; a merge from an xdelta repo
would be done the same way it is now:
  - check out any needed revisions
  - point diff3 at them
(Well, the implementation might be a bit different.  I think
those two steps are currently encapsulated within the compiled-in
copy of rcsmerge; if so, they'd have to be pulled up into the
CVS-proper layer.)

The fact that merging and delta generation currently use the same
algorithm is a coincidence, and as far as I know, nothing depends
on it.

> This would
> obviously depend partly on the file format, and I'm not
> an authority on common binary file formats.)

This is therefore an unrelated (albeit frequently debated) issue :-)


|  | /\
|-_|/  >   Eric Siegerman, Toronto, Ont.        address@hidden
|  |  /
With sufficient thrust, pigs fly just fine. However, this is not
necessarily a good idea.
        - RFC 1925 (quoting an unnamed source)

reply via email to

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