| |||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
The GNOME DVCS surveyThe GNOME DVCS surveyPosted Jan 5, 2009 23:48 UTC (Mon) by jengelh (subscriber, #33263)In reply to: The GNOME DVCS survey by lambda Parent article: The GNOME DVCS survey >Compared to the steps for Git Well, if you do it with git's plumbing, it is similarly hard:
It looks that mtn is still much of the plumbing tool that git once was, so at least give it some slack when doing comparisons
(Log in to post comments)
The GNOME DVCS survey Posted Jan 6, 2009 1:39 UTC (Tue) by jamesh (subscriber, #1159) [Link]
Unless monotone offers a simple command to do the equivalent of the three commands given, the criticism stands. It is also possible to expand the "bzr branch" command into multiple steps, but people would very rarely do that.
The GNOME DVCS survey Posted Jan 8, 2009 10:23 UTC (Thu) by vivi48 (subscriber, #6412) [Link] it does ...mtn clone monotone.ca net.venge.monotone
The GNOME DVCS survey Posted Jan 6, 2009 1:59 UTC (Tue) by lambda (subscriber, #40735) [Link]
Yes, but Monotone has been around for several years longer than Git. Git was in fact inspired by the
design of Monotone, but implemented to be much more efficient and to work better as a plumbing system that you could wrap porcelain around. Monotone is a big monolithic blob of C++, so it's fairly difficult to link to, and only around the time that Git was being developed did Monotone start addding a scripting interface with a standardized, parseable output format. And even still, there doesn't appear to be very good porcelain around it, while Git's design has meant that more porcelain has been written more quickly.
The GNOME DVCS survey Posted Jan 6, 2009 6:18 UTC (Tue) by sitaram (subscriber, #5959) [Link]
sorry, can't resist...
http://lwn.net/Articles/249460/ -- the last para but one is always worth a look :-)
|
|
||||||||||||