[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Revision control

From: Arne Babenhauserheide
Subject: Re: Revision control
Date: Sun, 1 Jun 2008 23:24:16 +0200
User-agent: KMail/1.9.9

Since there were no objections, I assume a bit of arguing about possible cvs 
replacements might be useful. 

Still, this doesn't imply that any decision is there to replace cvs, just that 
a discussion about alternatives might yield interesting results. 

Am Freitag 30 Mai 2008 20:10:04 schrieb Ivan Shmakov:
>       The total disk usage for the two repositories will typically be
>       less than the doubled disk usage for any one of them.  (As the

Mercurial offers the same, for GNU/Linux and Windows. 

>       Also, it's possible to use a related local repository as an
>       additional source for changesets while cloning a remote
>       repository over the network, allowing for the bandwidth saving
>       as well.

Did you test the efficiency (and how often it can be used)? 

>       Also, as Mercurial records only the parents of the revisions
>       (and not all their ancestors), it should become challenging to
>       implement the ``cherry-picking'' feature.  (Though I don't

There's a Google Summer of Code project doing that. 

And Mercurial knows the parents of parents, so it knows the whole history step 
by step. It avoids keeping duplicate data that way. 

>       really know any good implementation of it except for that in GNU
>       Arch.)
>       In general, I'd prefer Git as the DVCS for Hurd.  

I used it for the wiki, and it feels like walking in the underbrush of a dense 
There's much value in it, but there are also many hidden holes in the ground 
and denser patches of underbrush which I can't cross without carving a path 

I prefer to avoid having to cut a path, when I can get avoid the hassle and 
get the same power by using Mercurial. 

As a plus, I like the Mercurial documentation very much. Even advanced stuff 
can be found quickly. 
-> Example: The free licensed Mercurial book: http://hgbook.red-bean.com/

And I like what I know about the development model of Mercurial: Discussing 
the possible implications of every change in depth before introducing it, so 
it doesn't surprise me with features that might wreak havoc my repositories. 

In short: Mercurial just works, and I like that. 

>       Alas, I'll 
>       hardly have any spare time to dedicate to the Hurd development
>       in any foreseeable feature.

I'll likely stick to working on the wiki, so the new repository format doesn't 
matter that much to my personal work, but I'd prefer to see the Hurd 
development more accessible, and even though there are many good candidates, 
Mercurial is best suited for that, at least in my opinion. 

Best wishes, 
Unpolitisch sein
Heißt politisch sein
Ohne es zu merken. 
- Arne Babenhauserheide ( http://draketo.de )

-- Weblog: http://blog.draketo.de
-- Infinite Hands: http://infinite-hands.draketo.de - singing a part of the 
history of free software. 
-- Ein Würfel System: http://1w6.org - einfach saubere (Rollenspiel-) Regeln

-- Mein öffentlicher Schlüssel (PGP/GnuPG): 

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]