[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: base

From: Stephen J. Turnbull
Subject: Re: base
Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2010 00:34:54 +0900

Uday S Reddy writes:

 > > But wedged history *is* occasionally reported for bazaar.
 > Gosh, I don't know what you mean by "wedged".  Stuck?  Corrupted?

Stuck, like in the Southeast Asian monkey trap.  Data is in there,
probably not corrupt, but the program can't handle it and just throws
errors back at you for all high-level commands (commit, merge, maybe
even log).  Like the problems alluded to here:

 >    http://ww2.samhart.com/node/47
 > where git is being blamed as being the worst culprit in this
 > regard.

Sure, but if you do the arithmetic, the wedging incidents happened in
the summer of 2005.  git was a product whose first versions were coded
in early April of that year, whose first real test was in June, and
which didn't get released as "1.0" until December.

When Linus handed it over to Junio in July 2005, he considered it
ready for "technical users", ie, people ready to dive in and patch the
thing if it didn't work.  Sam Hart explicitly washes his hands of
responsibility to know about git, that was some other developer's job.
Not what Linus had in mind as the users git was ready for, eh?

reply via email to

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