On 03/04/2009 20:42, Guido Ostkamp wrote:
On Fri, 3 Apr 2009, Martin Hollmichel wrote:
Since the release engineering team is in favor of mercurial I ask - as
the tools project lead - the RE team to start the pilot for mercurial
now so that we will be able to have the new DSCM available with the
3.2 release.
I would like to know why the release engineering team is in favor of
Mercurial. Is there a place where I can read about it?
i'm not a release engineer...
I have been working with all 3 systems (bzr, git, hg) and while in my
mind Mercurial has the better UI, 'git' is certainly the fastest and
featurewise the most powerful system and from the mailing lists I feel,
the developer crew maintaining git is also much larger than those of the
other two systems.
then again, git is implemented in C, while mercurial/bzr are in python, so
the crews maintaining those might well make progress faster, even if they
might be smaller.
Mercurial lacks support for cheap inline feature branching and you
always have to clone the whole repo.
This costs tons of additional disk space and CPU time because you have
to rebuild everything from the ground up (object files, executables,
libraries etc.) as a feature branch always means a separate new
directory tree. Even the repo history must be duplicated if the clone is
not to be placed on the same physical filesystem because then the
hardlinks don't work.
well, you can have multiple heads in a single mercurial repository.
there's even a comparison with git here:
http://www.selenic.com/mercurial/wiki/index.cgi/GitConcepts
said comparison says that mercurial even has Named Branches, which, is
claimed, git lacks.
but personally i've never used git, so i can't tell if that is true today
with current version, or even if it was never true (maybe the authors of
that page just couldn't make sense of the git documentation).
Furthermore you would possibly need multiple repository clones to keep
track of several remote branches in Mercurial.
uhm, can't you just pull from all the remote repositories into one local
repository? you'll get multiple heads that way, which you can then merge
or whatever.
Have these topics been considered given the ultra large size of the
OpenOffice.org repo?
Regards
Guido
regards,
michael
--
I'm a dyslexic agnostic with insomnia...
I lie awake at night wondering if there really is a dog!
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
