swisspol
Joined 15 years ago
Joined 15 years ago
Unlimited undo / redo is achieved by taking a snapshot of the entire repo before and after any operation (e.g. checking out the repo or creating a branch etc...). The inspiration I had at the time was that is it is trivially cheap to take such snapshots: essentially all you need is a list of all the refs.
Then when you need to undo, you have 3 things: 1 - current state of all the refs in the repo 2 - state of all the refs from the before snapshot 3 - state of all the refs from the after snapshot Compute the delta between 3 -> 2 and apply on top of 1.
The same technique allows to do the Time Machine feature.
When the US fines foreign banks, VW group and others for incredibly higher amounts of money, it's fair-game but when France fines a US company after an 8 years investigation, it's not, and the authorities don't even get the benefit of doubt that maybe they know what they are doing and have a solid case? You don't have any basis to make such a statement that this is only about some revenge.
France was one of the top markets for Apple and had 20 years ago a vibrant network of small retailers dedicated to Apple hardware (without comparison with the distribution situation in the USA). That went downhill once Apple started its online store and then its physical stores. Maybe it's just survival of the fittest, or maybe Apple also tipped the balance in a way that's not ethical or maybe even not legal. That's why we have such government bodies as "Autorité de la Concurrence".
> it seems that Apple was engaged in some otherwise normal business practices.
The "Autorité de la Concurrence" probably has the best grasp compared to anyone on HN regarding what is "normal business practices" and what the law allows in France, which is not the USA.
From TC article, the accusations are rather quite specific:
=======================
The competition commissioner noted that Apple and its partners violated three specific areas:
— Apple and the two wholesalers agreed not to compete with each other and also to prevent other distributors to compete on price, “thereby sterilizing the wholesale market for Apple products.”
— Secondly, premium distributors were forced to keep prices high to keep them at the same level as those of integrated distributors.
— Third, Apple has “abused the economic dependence” of these premium distributors, by subjecting them to unfair and unfavorable commercial conditions compared to its network of integrated distributors. (These last two points relate specifically to the accusations eBizcuss had lodged against the company.)
=======================
It was a known fact at the time (10 years back or so) that independent Apple retailers were not getting stock from Apple for certain products and therefore couldn't meet demand from their customers. There were even some "hot" products that could only be bought from apple.com or its own physical stores. I don't know if some of these practices were illegal or not (that's why we have government bodies to act as arbiters and enforcers of the rules), but it certainly didn't help the retailers.
There's some more details in https://www.lemonde.fr/economie/article/2020/03/16/concurren....
Eventually the two will get merged but it will take some time to figure out the right copy.
Disclaimer: I made GitUp for that very reason ;)
But yes, I wasn't really worth actively maintaining it as it was feature complete and I didn't intend to build a business out of it.