Version control system better suted than SVN

[David Bremner]

Chanoch (Ken) Bloom wrote:

>      * Git keeps a local repository with full history in your working
>        directory. This means at least two copies of everything are
>        stored. [The amount of history can be controlled by using the
>        --depth option when you pull, but this can cause pushing and

The second copy is compressed, so is typically smaller than the svn
option.  My config repo (misc homedir stuff) with 1800 commits has 25M
of stuff, git part is 19M. Still probably not acceptable if space is
really tight. I suspect I have some big binary files commited
somewhere in that history. A more typical repo is a software project
with 90M of software and 30M of git history (around 500 commits in
total).

I think it is worth pointing out that no version control system that I
know about does a very good job with large binary files; on top of the
merging issues that Ken mentions in another message, they tend to blow
up the size of the repo. 

Git does support http writing in principle, but I think it is a bit of
a pain to set up (no person experience, I just know it is the least
preferred suggestion).

d