On Wed, 19 Dec 2012 12:06:05 +0100
Remigiusz Modrzejewski <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Dec 18, 2012, at 14:42 , Gilles wrote:
> > Out of curiosity, if someone is well-versed with Fossil and the main
> > DVCS systems (Mercurial, Git), I was wondering how Fossil compares to
> > them, for a single user, a small team (up to 20-30), and big teams
> > (thousands).
> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_revision_control_software#Distributed_model
> > Besides the fact that Fossil includes a wiki and a bug tracker, does
> > it offer features that would make it a better solution than the big
> > names?
> Maybe I missed it skimming the thread, but I didn't notice anyone telling
> about the big point.
> There is an attitude difference between Fossil and the other two, which put
> in database terms would be:
> Fossil does replication, Git and Mercurial do sharding.
A lot of the things you discussed have been touched on, but not this
central point:
> The big names have been created for huge teams, where people generally don't
> want to be overwhelmed by tentative work done by others. Therefore they work
> in isolation, issuing pull requests once the thing is done. Especially in Git
> it's popular to compress all the commits to be pulled into one big commit.
> But the important thing is the isolation.
This is a description of workflows, not SCM properties. I've never
used that workflow with either git or mercurial (part of my believing
that history is sacrosanct). I've pretty much always pushed & pulled
everything no matter which DSCM I use.
In SCM terms, this boils down to fossil not having an easy way to
cherry-pick changes to move between repositories. The default
push/pull for mercurial is the same as fossil - everything. For git,
it's more complicated, but I believe it can be configured so you get
the "exchange everything" behavior if you want it.
The bottom line is that if your organization needs fine control over
which changes gets exchanged between repositories, fossil isn't for
you. At least not yet.
> It stands in stark contrast to Fossil's "everybody has a copy of everything".
Except for private branches. There's been some discussion about adding
more control over push/pull to fossil, but I don't believe it's
happened yet.
<mike
--
Mike Meyer <[email protected]> http://www.mired.org/
Independent Software developer/SCM consultant, email for more information.
O< ascii ribbon campaign - stop html mail - www.asciiribbon.org
_______________________________________________
fossil-users mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
