On Sat, Feb 28, 2009 at 10:21 AM, Ben Finney <ben+deb...@benfinney.id.au> wrote:
> This issue is avoidable if the repository is a Bazaar one: But what does it solve ? The main problem with downloading the whole history is the time taken. The only way to know the relative speed is to measure; in my experience, with a git server, git is as fast as svn to get not too big repositories. It of course depends on the speed of the connection, servers, etc... Only experiment can tell. Bzr, OTOH, is extremely slow at network operations, much slower than git and/or svn. > >> I can to some agree with Sandro here. I'm not a big fan of svn, but >> for the DPMT repository svn looks like the right choice to me. The >> big benefit of using svn is that each and every directory in a svn >> repository can be checked out forming a stand-alone local copy. And >> this exactly is not possible with other recently more-popular VCS >> such as Mercurial and git. > > Bazaar, on the other hand, has a feature for this in newer versions > (Bazaar 1.9 and later): you can create a “stacked branch”, allowing > a casual contributor to get just that part of the repository I have never used stacked branches, but are you sure you can only branch the repository data related to a subset of the working tree only ? My understanding is that bzr stacked branches are useful to avoid downloading the whole history, but that you still need to get the whole project. I think it would be very difficult to support the usual features of DVCS without it ? I really don't like svn, but in this case, I don't see the point of changing. git-svn has almost no drawback in this case, and can be used by anyone who does not like svn, without forcing changes on anyone else. David -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-python-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
