Re: GNOME DVCS Survey Results
- From: David Zeuthen <david fubar dk>
- To: Ali Sabil <ali sabil gmail com>
- Cc: Frederic Peters <fpeters gnome org>, foundation-list gnome org, desktop-devel-list gnome org
- Subject: Re: GNOME DVCS Survey Results
- Date: Sun, 04 Jan 2009 17:29:02 -0500
On Sun, 2009-01-04 at 23:20 +0100, Ali Sabil wrote:
> First, it only makes it much harder for users to grasp; we're
> going to
> end up with some projects have l.g.o pages / README files /
> mailing list
> messages saying "use bzr to check out this branch" and others
> saying the
> same for git. That's *not* desirable; it makes it so much
> harder for new
> That's not what John's proposal is about ! John wants to use the bzr
> format as a repository format, and add a git-serve plugin to bzr to be
> able to "talk" to the git clients. In other words, you will be able to
> access the same data using either bzr, git or hg.
Uh, but that's exactly how I understood the proposal and I believe that
the points I made (that you didn't respond to) still stands: That it's
crazy to officially want to support git, bzr and hg *at* the same time
*from* the same repo. It's just asking for trouble.
> Finally: We're talking about people's data here. The first
> rule of
> holding peoples data is that you don't screw around with it
> because". Data integrity matters. Keeping things simple and
> staying with
> a *single* kind of hammer (instead of a weird homegrown mutant
> helps here. Otherwise we end up with data loss. Frankly, I'm
> that some people are even considering using such homegrown
> kludges for
> holding our GNOME source code.
> Comparing the size of the Bazaar unit tests with those of Git, I would
> certainly choose Bazaar for storing my data.
I wasn't commenting on bzr vs git storage format; I'm sure either is
fine. I was commenting on the fact that someone proposes to inject
something like git-serve in the middle; that's what I think is a kludge.
] [Thread Prev