Skip to content

Comment on Version control second comingparent

Comments

From my experience Git LFS is extremely brittle and will break your local check out if you so much as breath on it wrong. Perforce is an expensive solution to the problems of LFS, and I've yet to find a workflow as powerful as my git workflows for managing code.

I don't really see what the article is talking about as the future, but if P4 or Git LFS is the best we can do as a species then we're doomed. All VCS options suck for one reason or another, I hope we don't stop trying to make something better. If only to save me from perforce.

Git and P4 are not meant to be directly competitive here.

Git is for teams that are distributed across space & time. P4 is significantly better at centralized teams who work in the same physical office.

I am curious what in LFS is breaking for you.

Git and P4 are not meant to be directly competitive here.

True, but for the problems that Git LFS solves P4 is usually the other option. P4 handles large binaries very well, caveat being the rest of P4. In some projects the caveats are worth it. I work in video games and our in house engine has an unfiltered checkout size over a 1TB.

I've found LFS very brittle when bouncing between branches and moving around in history. There's been many times I've had my local check out blow up through rebases or mistakes I've made. Many times the recovery is to nuke and re-clone. With a 1TB repo that's not a good option.

It's been a while since I've used it, and I'm sure some of my problems were skill issues, but I never found it worth the pain at any scale I've tried to use it.

AboutSource Built by g1lg1l

Hackerly is an independent reader for Hacker News, built on the public HN API. Not affiliated with Y Combinator.