[ciphershed] Re: TrueCrypt development history

  • From: Dimitri Schoolwerth <dimitri@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: ciphershed@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2014 02:20:37 +0400

On 6/18/14, 1:19, Jason Pyeron wrote:
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Dimitri Schoolwerth
>> Sent: Tuesday, June 17, 2014 16:54

>> It's ~12 MB for a repo with only 7.1a and ~52 MB for a repo 
>> with history
>> of all TC releases. That's excluding any compression done 
>> during transport.
> I woulde be fine with an ISO in the repo, but is everyone else happy with it?

I would not be fine with that, but I don't see how it is related.

>> To clarify: the repo does not contain something like a 
>> directory per TC
>> release. Instead there's a commit (and tag) per TC release (with a
>> commit date the same as the date of TC release).
> Interesting, I was thinking it was going to be more overt than a tag. Would 
> the
> point to be overt in showing attention to the archive versions?

Did you mean "What's the point" ? To clarify more: it is not the
archives that are committed and tagged, it's the *extracted* archives.
It is not different or less overt than tagging any other source release
at some point.

For completeness, here's the generated repo again:


And here's an example difference between blame with TC history:


and without:



Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Other related posts: