Subject: Re: GSoC - Some questions on the idea of

From: Neal Kreitzinger <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2012 11:44:23 -0500

On 4/11/2012 1:04 AM, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
> Neal Kreitzinger wrote:
>
>> Maybe small binaries do xdelta well and the above is a moot point.
>
> If I am reading it correctly, diff-delta copes fine with smallish
> binary files that have not changed much.
>
> I would suggest tracking source code instead of binaries if
> possible, though.
>
I suppose the original "source" in git (linux kernel) was so low level
that it had no graphics files.  However, most projects are end-user
projects and have graphics so I would think that tracking them is a
normal expected use of git to version your software.  If you're going to 
do that then there shouldn't be a problem tracking other binaries that 
are static constants across all servers (as opposed to user edited 
content like databases).  I would consider this subset of "binaries" to 
be the expected domain of git revision control for software, ie, gui 
software.  Graphics files for your app are "source".  The binary is all 
you have.  It's the "source" that you edit to make changes.

Maybe I'm missing something here.  Maybe graphics files are "container" 
files and that makes them a problem.

v/r,
neal