Re:Noms – A versioned, forkable, syncable database
by rpedela on Saturday October 15, 2016 @09:34PM
(#12716401)
No not really. CVS and git are basically the same thing but git is a lot better in many ways. I don't know if noms is really the git for data but those other tools are more like CVS in this analogy: clunky and slow.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Noms – A versioned, forkable, syncable database
by emmelaich on Saturday October 15, 2016 @09:53PM
(#12716437)
They are so different it's hard to know what you mean by "basically the same thing"
Re:Noms – A versioned, forkable, syncable database
by rpedela on Saturday October 15, 2016 @11:05PM
(#12716666)
Yes there are significant differences in terms of feature, implementation, etc but they have the same goal: manage source code versions.
Re:Noms – A versioned, forkable, syncable database
by emmelaich on Sunday October 16, 2016 @09:23PM
(#12722106)
That's how Git is used but I think that by design, it is foremost a userlevel append-only content-addressable file system.
The difference between this and a version control system is a major part of why the UI is so awful.