| |||||||||||
Emacs chooses BazaarEmacs chooses BazaarPosted Mar 13, 2008 16:27 UTC (Thu) by hmh (subscriber, #3838)Parent article: Emacs chooses Bazaar
Well, arch/bazaar/bzr are much slower than git, but OTOH, they have a lot of room to improve (unlike git, which has to take a lot of more pain to improve, since it is so far up the curve already), and AFAIK, Canonical is working hard on bzr. But the real timehog issue when converting from CVS to anything else less stupid (bzr, hg, git, monotone, whatever) is that you look at the resulting history, and go YUCK! One never really looks at history in CVS. One tries to ignore it as best as one can, because it is ugly as all heck. That's not what happens when you get better tools where the history and branching is actually useful for something. So, suddenly, you ARE looking at all that horrible snapshot of your past, and you cannot easily ignore its existence anymore. It is cleanup time, and that has to be done mostly manually, which takes time. cvsps is a lifesaver helper, but it doesn't do nearly well enough to produce a very clean history, especially when you have lots of branching.
(Log in to post comments)
Emacs chooses Bazaar Posted Mar 14, 2008 1:44 UTC (Fri) by dmarti (subscriber, #11625) [Link] For me, anyway, the size and speed of git makes it practical to use for stuff that I would not have had under revision control, such as small web projects and article notes. I also have "etckeeper" by Joey Hess installed on a new machine, to keep /etc in git. (I should write something about this one -- it's hooked into apt so you get a commit of config file changes that happen on package install. Very nifty and potentially work-saving, though I haven't been running it very long and haven't rolled anything back.) So it's natural for me not to have to learn two DVCSs thoroughly, and use git for larger-scale projects too.
Emacs chooses Bazaar Posted Mar 14, 2008 3:34 UTC (Fri) by njs (subscriber, #40338) [Link] >For me, anyway, the size and speed of git makes it practical to use for stuff that I would not have had under revision control, such as small web projects and article notes. I don't understand what you mean here. Small projects are exactly those where all VCSes can perform all operations instantaneously; git's optimizations are all about scaling up?
Emacs chooses Bazaar Posted Mar 14, 2008 3:58 UTC (Fri) by MarkWilliamson (subscriber, #30166) [Link] I don't know what the OP meant to say, but to me the modern DVCS systems seem much more practical for keeping small, simple projects in than, say, CVS or SVN. They keep all the repository state in a single directory, within your working tree; there's no separate repository. In this respect it's rather like using RCS (except better!), which always used to be my solution to revision controlling single files / small groups of files.
Emacs chooses Bazaar Posted Mar 14, 2008 3:31 UTC (Fri) by njs (subscriber, #40338) [Link] "arch/bazaar/bzr" is probably not the best way to think of them -- there are two completely unrelated VCS designs, one called "arch" and "bazaar", and another called "bzr". "bzr" is far more closely related to mtn/hg/git than it is to "bazaar". Yes, this is confusing. For most purposes the best solution is to just forget "arch" and "bazaar" ever existed, since they're now only of historical interest.
|
|||||||||||