[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: patch vs. overwrite in bzr

From: joakim
Subject: Re: patch vs. overwrite in bzr
Date: Fri, 06 Apr 2012 22:01:57 +0200
User-agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.0.94 (gnu/linux)

chad <address@hidden> writes:

> On Apr 6, 2012, at 3:20 AM, Bastien wrote:
>>> Like what?  And how much faster is "faster"?
>> Like "significantly for my own usage".
>> Check this source for a comparison:
>> http://doc.bazaar.canonical.com/migration/en/why-switch-to-bazaar.html#high-storage-efficiency-and-speed>
>> Git might be slower on Windows, though.
>> I think nobody really disagree with git being faster. 
> Both the Bazaar and git people agree that bazaar/git is faster than 
> git/bazaar on some things and slower on others.  Eli is (I believe) curious 
> about what things you're doing that seem importantly faster on git.  
> The bazaar doc you reference says specifically this about speed:
>       Git is faster but Bazaar is clearly fast enough for 99.9% of
>       users. If Bazaar 2.x is genuinely too slow for you on your
>       project, please tell us where and we’ll do what we can to fix
>       the problem for you.
> Like emacs versus vi, this question has quite a lot of ``well-known 
> knowledge'' that is widely spread, oft-quoted, and generally untrue.  That 
> isn't meant to imply that your experience is invalid; simply to point out 
> that `the common conception says...' is often well off the mark in this area.
>> Since I agree this is the main one, I won't argue about the other 
>> issues anyway :)  And I guess we all have too much to do to argue
>> on such things.  
> True, very true.  It is *perhaps* worth talking about as a `background task', 
> though, because there are many VCS things that become much easier if two 
> linked systems use the *same* dVCS, and Emacs seems very likely to stick with 
> Bazaar for philosophical reasons.

I hesitate to inject more noise, but here goes anyway.

I use bzr for Emacs and Inkscape, Git for most other projects, Svn at

Bzr is okay for most things, except it lacks co-located branches, and
has some bugs. I tried using the "loom" plugin for a while, but then the
repository format became incompatible with upstream. I tried the git-bzr
git plugin for a while but that didn't work too well because of bugs in
bzr fastimport. (these bugs are reported upstream)

The thing I would like to achieve in the Emacs case that is tedious with
bzr is to maintain a long lived branch(the emacs xwidgets branch),
together with some various patches, and use these as my local primary
Emacs. This workflow is pretty convenient in Git with colocated
branches. AFAIK it is a planned feature for Bzr but it's not ready yet.

I feel I provide less Emacs patches than I could because of this lack. I
would be interested to know how other Emacs developers handle this
situation. Perhaps there is something I am missing?

> I hope that helps,
> *Chad

Joakim Verona

reply via email to

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