From: Larry M. <lm...@bi...> - 2011-03-26 16:05:31
|
On Sat, Mar 26, 2011 at 12:48:49PM +0200, Adrian Robert wrote: > Updates also use more bandwidth than a non-dVCS, since you have to > get the history and logs for all intervening changes, instead of just > the diff between you and latest. Again, I can't speak for fossil, but what you are saying is not true for BitKeeper, it's very bandwidth sparing. We've had people use it over modems just fine, including large projects like the Linux kernel. -- --- Larry McVoy lm at bitmover.com http://www.bitkeeper.com |