Daniel Cheng wrote: > 2009/4/1 Matthew Toseland <[email protected]>: >> We (Ian, nextgens and I) agreed some time ago that we would try mercurial >> out. >> There is no consensus on git vs mercurial, however there is a clear, broad >> consensus that either would be better than SVN. This decision ran into a >> series of technical and communications problems, and was severely delayed, >> but will finally be implemented in the near future. The fact that at least >> four people have imported git repositories from SVN should tell us something! >> Therefore, nextgens will in the near future post an email explaining that we >> will do the switch in the very near future, including details of expected >> downtime and how to access the hg repository. The SVN repository will be made >> read-only, and HG will become the official repository. > > > Replies to some discussion in IRC: >> 02:53 <@toad_> well, we chose hg because 1) much better http transport (good >> for freenet, good for open repo's), 2) better java support, 3) better >> windows support > [...] >> 03:04 <@toad_> well there were some technical issues - the HTTP transport >> isn't very good is a big one, I think re java it's unclear, re windows i'm >> not sure > > 1] HTTP Support: > > http support in freenet is via WebDAV, which is a web standard. > > However, if you want to flexible (i.e. _real_ access control), you > should use ssh. > Map the login shell to git-shell (using authorized_keys , or just > edit the user profile). >
No way. We have been there... I really don't miss the delays of when I'm sshing in without a valid reverse dns entry. Nor the inability to commit (push, whatever you call it) when I'm behind a http-only proxy. > 2] Java support: > > Do you means IDE support? > EGit is a eclipse integration. > I think he meant "like openjdk does". But speaking about IDE, Netbeans have native hg support. > There are plans to make egit a official eclipse project -- they have > submitted a (draft) proposal to EMO (Eclipse Management Organization) > > 3] Windows support. > > git windows port is not as polish as the unix varient, but it works. > Never mention the egit use a pure java implementation (jgit), which is > platform independent. > Arguably we^wI don't care about this one. It's not like we had many or even any windows developer. However I see an argument for choosing a tool which will allow them to contribute if they want to. > > Rants asides, there are a few different between git/hg that you may > want to know: > > 1] bandwidth > git native git:// protocol use much lessor bandwidth with hg, > but i think you are going http:// . or do you? > We are going HTTP in any case... And as far as http support is concerned, HG is much more efficient than git. > 2] Permissions / Access control > git you need ssh/git-shell or git:// to restrict write > access to specific directory. > the recommended way, however, is splitting the repository > into many smaller repositories. > > hg as much as apache .htaccess can do, afaict. > We are going to change the model in any case imho. I am not sure we want anyone else but the Reviewers to push to the auto-built tree. We might provide per-dev trees or encourage people to use github/bitbucket ... > 3] Partial Clone ( clone only a sub directory) > git no, split it to smaller repositories. > > hg [readonly] preliminary support. > > 4] Branching > git "light weighted", really fast. allow ant/make only > build the changed files > > hg mostly you will clone the repository for a new branch. > there were some plans to change that, but i have no idea. On unix clones are almost free (you can hardlink them if they are on the same FS) _______________________________________________ Devl mailing list [email protected] http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
