Migrating the version history is not the problem with either solution. Linux development is a world of its own, and git is not inherently more dangerous in experienced hands. It's just that it's somewhat more difficult to become skilled in git than it is to become skilled in mercurial, and beginners can really screw repositories up with git (e.g. by using rebase to squash revisions and force pushing the repo)
That said, I use git almost exclusively every day, and like it, so it's not a huge hurdle. On Fri, Oct 19, 2012 at 2:53 PM, Edward K. Ream <[email protected]> wrote: > On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 5:25 PM, Ville M. Vainio <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Some oldish news that may increase interest in transitioning from bzr to >> mercurial [ or git] > > I agree: Bzr seems a bit dated. > > I find it hard to believe that git is all that dangerous: wouldn't > Linux development collapse if it were? > > I don't want to lose Leo's 5500+ checkin logs. Unless we can preserve > Leo's bzr history I won't be interested in changing from bzr to > something else. > > Edward > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "leo-editor" group. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > [email protected]. > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/leo-editor?hl=en. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "leo-editor" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/leo-editor?hl=en.
