[haiku-development] Re: Moving away from Subversion (pt 4)
- From: Ingo Weinhold <ingo_weinhold@xxxxxx>
- To: haiku-development@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sun, 05 Dec 2010 22:44:55 +0100
On 2010-12-05 at 21:11:56 [+0100], Enrico Weigelt <weigelt@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > unreadable revision numbers.
>
> There aren't any revision numbers. Instead it operates on
> cryptographic hash keys. Most the time you'll be working
> with references (branch heads, tags, etc), so it doesnt hurt
> that much.
I know the threads have stretched out over a long time, but please let's
try not to rediscuss dead arguments. git features lightweight tags that can
possibly be used to automatically mark commits with consecutive revision
numbers. Oliver conducted performance tests with them at the last
BeGeistert, though I don't know of their outcome.
[...]
> > Mercurial is quite easy to learn and use, and has the
> > potential to be just as powerful as Git.
>
> NAK. It's branching and remoting concepts are quite dubious.
> Driving own workflows ontop of it is quite painful. I'm maintaining
> several hundreds of different packages, and hq here counts just as
> old legacy that's nothing more than an external datasource.
> If customers ask me to work in hq, I charge an extra penalty fee.
Subjective comments like this are really no help. And it's hg, not hq.
Anyway, I believe the main issue of hg under Haiku identified so far is
that its branching method requires hardlinks to work reasonably well, which
BFS doesn't support.
But please, let's just wait for the "task force" to finish their work. I'm
sure they'll come up with a good comparison with focus on the requirements
of the Haiku project.
CU, Ingo
Other related posts:
