On Sat, 13 Oct 2012 01:25:11 +0300 "Ville M. Vainio" <[email protected]> wrote:
> - There is also a third realistic choice, git. But I believe hg would > be a more natural target, in that it behaves pretty much like bzr and > makes it much harder to accidentally lose data than git. I guess I'm not seeing the impetus to drop bzr until it starts to cause a problem in some way? I'm sure git has an edge on it technology wise for large complex projects, but Leo has maybe half a dozen commiters, a relatively low commit rate, and a structure which usually avoids merging related issues. So, when bzr no longer meets our needs, it should go, but right now it seems able to handle everything we want from it, unlike SVN or CVS or whatever we switched from. So, I don't mind if it gets changed, but I don't see the need to change. Also, not sure how git works in a Windows environment, maybe that's not an issue anymore? Cheers -Terry -- 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.
