[haiku-development] Re: Finally deciding on a new source control system for Haiku

  • From: Niels Sascha Reedijk <niels.reedijk@xxxxxxxxx>
  • To: haiku-development@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Tue, 3 May 2011 15:13:15 +0200


2011/5/3 Axel Dörfler <axeld@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
> Brecht Machiels<brecht@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> I've seen several independent benchmarks (they should be easy to find),
>> and git is indeed the fastest and it's repositories are the smallest.
> It doesn't really matter which tool is the fastest at a specific action, but 
> if the tool's performance is acceptable.
> While I guess that git will be faster overall compared to hg, I don't expect 
> it would be a performance issue to use either tool for our repository.
> And while I would usually prefer hg over git, I think the missing hard link 
> feature of BFS simply disqualifies hg for now. And why not use git then, if 
> it comes down to preference, anyway?

Actually, hg should not be disqualified because of BFS hard links.
With the hg bookmarks extension you can create in-tree local
light-weight 'branches'. In fact, this works exactly like how git
works. So, like I said before, feature-wise there is no difference
between these tools.

[Some background, there is a difference between git and hg when it
comes to branches. For hg, branch names are associated with
changesets. So a changeset 'knows' it is part of a certain branch. In
git, a branch name is really more a name that is associated with a
head. The hg bookmarks extension brings this to hg: it allows you to
give a name to a 'head' without inscribing it into changesets.]



Other related posts: