HN Explorer

16 comments

[ 2.7 ms ] story [ 48.3 ms ] thread
simgidacav
Wait, what? How could someone reconstruct single commits? There was no Git back then! The patch program is quite old (1985), but those patches go back to 1972.
autoreleasepool
Here's the first "synthetic commit" from June 20, 1972

https://github.com/dspinellis/unix-history-repo/commit/67174...

pjc50
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Source_Code_Control_System dates from 1972. The evolution appears to have been SCCS -> RCS -> CVS -> svn|hg|bzr|git (cambrian explosion) -> git (mass extinction).
davidgerard
I'd place the explosion around the time of CVS - but that was an explosion of proprietary VCSes. They didn't have to be as good as git, they just had to be better than CVS.
pjc50
Mm, although I felt that Rational Clearcase, MVS, and Visual Sourcesafe were mostly worse than CVS.
pjmlp
Given my experience on the enterprise, you can still use the present form.

Although I do like gated checkins in TFS without having to roll our own solutions.

ajross
SCCS was contemporary with early unix development, so certainly it's technically possible that there are revision histories going back that far. But I'd have to believe that the early commits in this repo are just release checkpoints. It looks like the most recent stuff (1994) dates from early proto-FreeBSD work.
cyphar
Because Git wasn't the first version control system. Nor was it the first bringover-modify-merge model of distributed source control.
[deleted]
(comment deleted)
NickBourbaki
OK, you are going to say that Subversion is old and outdated. But it is not: http://svnvsgit.com/#dvcs-myth
justinjlynn
>no access control, full copy of repository on every computer, no exclusive files locks and so on

but those are benefits

justinjlynn
actually, on reading the rest of the page... backs away slowly from religious war
[deleted]
(comment deleted)