On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 05:08:56PM +0100, Roberto E. Vargas Caballero wrote: > > The git source tree is more than four hundred percent bigger than the > > are you comparing the size of a project in python with the size of a project > written in C?. The logical relation should be 2 times the size of hg, and > then you could say that they have a similar size.
No, if the logical relation is double the size, then git is STILL twice as big as THAT. > It is due to git keeps the api in small programs than you could use in your > scripts. These small programs are 100% Unix philosophy (do only one thing and > do it fine, write an output that can be used as input for other, ...). Work > with these low-level progams (plumbling in git vocabulary) is hard, and it > is the reason git have a 'user friendly' (porcelain in git vocabulary) > programs, which are pretty similar to these you can find in mercurial. If > you don't need an advanced use of git then you will read only the pages of > porcelain programs, whose number is similar to the programs in mercurial. > > Maybe you like more have a library and have to link all the others programs > with it, and duplicate the work in all the binaries where the library is > linked, instead of using small programs. All you've done is convince me that git is its own operating system. It's ludicrously complex and needlessly huge. I don't care that it is trendy or popular with developers; most of the 'benefits' you listed are basically using git as though it were an entire disk filesystem. git-stash is revolting.
