Hi Colin, > > and (b) extremely slow compared to git, sometimes slower by a factor > > 10 or more, even for the most fundamental operations like the > > equivalent to `cvs log'. > > This is the standard criticism. It might matter for very large > projects like Emacs with very deep history but is not in practice a > problem for smaller projects (and certainly any distributed VCS will > be much faster than 'cvs log' since they don't need to go to the > network for this data). Personally, I find that I lose much more time > to battling with obscure user interfaces than I've ever lost in > waiting for bzr (computer time is cheap, brain time is expensive); for > normal operations on the projects I work with it's easily fast enough.
I just find git too repulsive on the UI front to bother using, in fact I actively try and avoid using it. bzr's my preference and, since they concentrated on performance a few releases back, has easily coped with anything I use it for. On an aside, if Debian are to persist in sticking with their old groff fork, is there any chance Ubuntu may break ranks and switch back to Werner's latest and greatest? Cheers, Ralph.
