On Jan 4, 2008 12:21 PM, David Cournapeau <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I understand the "sumpy uses it" reason, it is definitely a factor. > But I would rather have a more thorough study on the merits of each > system. For example, being a user of bzr for a year and a half now, I > think I have a pretty good idea on how it works, and its advantages. > We could then decide on a set of attributes to compare, and people who > knows about one tool could then tell about it. > > Performances-wise, hg and bzr really are comparable nowadays for > common, local operations. I don't think it is a relevant parameter for > the hg vs bzr choice anymor, specially for scipy/numpy which are small > projects (I have bzr imports of scipy and scikits, so I can give some > numbers if you need them). Third party tools, special abilities (svn > import, storage efficiency, special commands, etc...) are more > important I think
Absolutely. That's why I said above "when the choice is a sound one on technical merit alone". At the time (for sage/sympy) the bzr/hg choice was unmistakably in favor of hg. Things might be different today. Incidentally, the emacs guys seem to be worrying about the same thing: http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel/85893 If they actually do the work of comparing tools, that work may be useful for us. I'm pretty sure that any tool that can handle the entire history of emacs can chew on numpy/scipy/ipython/matplotlib *combined* for breakfast. Cheers, f _______________________________________________ Numpy-discussion mailing list Numpy-discussion@scipy.org http://projects.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
