Which would support your argument, but I don’t think this is particularly new.
I think their article reads a bit differently, they haven't optimised git, they've ditched it in favour of a new CVS.
Do you mean VCS?
I don't think so, their article says they were seeing 30,000 commits a day in September, when I was at Meta six years ago they were easily doing that.
Supposedly they started gzipping the conversations.
I think Git is becoming a protocol and that is good. Let a thousand flowers bloom. On the other hand, would any of the parties mentioned share their code with anyone? If so, would anyone be ever interested in using it?
On the other hand, some lower-level tools have to be simple, reliable and efficient. Here, sharing is critical. Even the authors of the post shared some incremental improvements to git. Here, the slop-cannon-scalability story is moot.
I think git is becoming a protocol. One product can no longer cover these cases.
The point of my response is that the analogy was broken without saying what adding those pages could provide.
The analogy isn't broken. Your objection didn't really make sense, because adding pages to the tax code makes the tax code strictly more complicated. Your response just ignored the case where that complexity actually matters.
"the entire point of git is moot"
agents benefit from the same abstractions as humans do and they also benefit from a version system where the history can be tracked back where merch conflicts become obvious and so onI am watching OpenAI's output, and while a lot of it is absurdly impressive, I can not even begin to imagine what kind of activity of theirs justifies a through-output of 5 petabytes of -GIT COMMITS-. That's not their data sets, that's not their models, that's not their math library. That's their code.
They're rengineering Git for scale, but like, why is there a demand for scale at all? If i saw an employee flipping the same number on an excel file over and over, I'd fire them, and yet they're perfectly happy running agents that do that and setting up meetings and writing blogposts about how much they improved their spreadsheet number randomization factory.
Seventh, at least, all the major code forges are on it: https://about.gitlab.com/blog/scaling-git-for-the-agentic-so...
Entire also seems focused on this: https://entire.com/news/entire-launches-distributed-git-netw...
- Cursor: https://cursor.com/blog/git-at-any-scale
- GitHub: https://github.blog/engineering/architecture-optimization/bu...
- Anthropic: https://www.anthropic.com/research/redesigning-source-contro...
- GitHub: https://github.blog/engineering/architecture-optimization/th...
Maybe also tangentially East River Source Control's too: https://ersc.io/blog/what-comes-after-git.
I'm wondering how much cross-pollination of ideas and subsequent implementation details there are between people working at these companies. It does seem like all of this could potentially converge.