| 1 |
Rich Freeman <rich0@g.o> wrote: |
| 2 |
> |
| 3 |
> git has the advantage that it can just read the current HEAD and from |
| 4 |
> that know exactly what commits are missing, so there is way less |
| 5 |
> effort spent figuring out what changed. |
| 6 |
|
| 7 |
I don't know the exact protocol, but I would assume that git is |
| 8 |
even more efficient: I would assume |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
1. git transfers only changes between similar files |
| 11 |
(in contrast: rsync could only do this if the filename has not |
| 12 |
changed, and even that is switched off for portage syncing). |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
2. git transfers compressed data. |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
(Both are assumptions which perhaps some git guru might confirm.) |
Archives