On Sat, 2007-09-15 at 21:44 -0400, Behdad Esfahbod wrote: > On Sun, 2007-09-16 at 01:10 +0200, Ali Sabil wrote: > > > > I am also afraid that we might be just becoming nothing more but "geek > > > > fashion" addicts trying to follow the latest RCS tendency without > > > > really building solid and constructive arguments ! > > > > > > I was going to be offended, but you warned :). Now that most probably > > > means that you don't hack on the more crowded projects that much... > > > Many Gtk+ developers for example could not have been as productive as > > > they are right now if it wasn't for git-svn. And that's only a > > > half-arsed solution. > > > > > > > Yeah, I am not against DRCS at all, in fact I cannot stand using svn > > or any CRCS, what I was pointing out is that basically everyone is > > calling for using git while superior alternatives to git exists out > > there. I am not a user of Mercurial for example, but I think it is the > > DRCS out there that gives a very good balance between ease of use, > > speed and functionalities. Actually I use bzr daily, but I cannot > > claim that bzr is very fast (the upcomming 0.92 is supposed to be > > quite fast). > > > > I think that both bzr and mercurial give a better balance than git, > > which is indeed very fast on posix systems, but ad Ross said a while > > ago : "Git is a good core of a yet to be written revision control > > system". I think that Git is to revision control system, what > > Autotools is to build systems. > > > > I am just afraid that everyone is calling for using Git, without even > > considering the existing and less hyped alternatives. > > > > And again don't get offended by what I say ;) I am just calling for a > > fair comparison of the tools, instead of a biased one :) > > Ok, lets be fair: most people who care about hacking on GNOME already > know git, why should other options be selected? Seriously, kernel is > using it, freedesktop.org is using it, and KDE is considering it. Git > is one of those ones you need to learn at some point anyway. Bazaar on > the other hand from what I see is a Ubuntu/Canonical focus and > Mercurial's biggest deployment, yet to be finished, will be Mozilla. > I've seen many Mozilla hackers regret that they are not moving to git. > > Was going to add these to the wiki page, feel free to do: > > - Keith Packard did a fairly extensive research of which DSCM system > to use for xorg and other fd.o projects, from a storage robustness / > performance point of view, and he wrote this excellent piece: > > http://keithp.com/blog/Repository_Formats_Matter.html This document is a year old; projects that are under heavy development like Bazaar are misrepresented. For instance bzr has changed it's repository format, and is much faster that it was a year ago. > Surprising to some, he comes to the same conclusion that Linus does > about SVN. And here is Linus clarifying many aspects of git vs central > repositories for KDE hackers: > > http://lwn.net/Articles/246381/ > -- __C U R T I S C. H O V E Y_______ Guilty of stealing everything I am.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part