lists  /  announce  owl-users  owl-dev  john-users  john-dev  passwdqc-users  yescrypt  popa3d-users  /  oss-security  kernel-hardening  musl  sabotage  tlsify  passwords  /  crypt-dev  xvendor  /  Bugtraq  Full-Disclosure  linux-kernel  linux-netdev  linux-ext4  linux-hardening  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:	Fri, 07 Dec 2007 14:36:25 -0500
To:	Al Boldi <>
Cc:	Jakub Narebski <>, Andreas Ericsson <>,
	Johannes Schindelin <>,
	Phillip Susi <>,
	Linus Torvalds <>,
	Jing Xue <>,,
Subject: Re: git guidance

On Fri, 07 Dec 2007 22:04:48 +0300, Al Boldi said:

> Because WORKFLOW C is transparent, it won't affect other workflows.  So you 
> could still use your normal WORKFLOW B in addition to WORKFLOW C, gaining an 
> additional level of version control detail at no extra cost other than the 
> git-engine scratch repository overhead.
> BTW, is git efficient enough to handle WORKFLOW C?

Imagine the number of commits a 'make clean; make' will do in a kernel tree, as
it commits all those .o files... :)

Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped

Powered by blists - more mailing lists