I have been using mercurial for some time now. I just discovered that the introductory documentation has been improved and consolidated in an online book-in-progress: http://hgbook.red-bean.com/hgbook.html
Eric David Cournapeau wrote: > On Jan 5, 2008 5:36 AM, Charles R Harris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >> A quick google for benchmarks show that a year ago, hg was a bit faster and >> generated smaller repositories than bzr, but I don't think the difference is >> enough to matter. > > Forget a year ago, because as far as bzr is concerned, they got much > faster (several times faster for common operations like > commit/branch/log/merge). > >> but Linus was definitely focused on speed, which is easy to understand if >> you look at the churn in the kernel. Anyway, I suspect that, technically, >> both bzr and hg are suitable choices. I'm not sure esr correct that it is >> unlikely that both are going to last long term, bazaar (the ancestor of bzr) >> is used for Ubuntu. But the two are similar and fill the same niche, so I >> expect that one or the other will become dominant in the wild. And hg seems >> to have the advantage of a head start and not being as tightly tied to >> Linux. > > bzr is not tied to linux. They always have win32 binaries, TortoiseBzr > has a longer history than the mercurial one, and as said previously, > one developer of bzr at least is mainly a windows user. I don't want > to sound like I defend bzr, because honestly, I don't care about which > one is used, but so far, the arguments I heard against bzr do not > reflect my experience at all. > > One thing that bzr tries hard is the general UI, and the explicit > support for several workflows (with moderately advanced concepts such > as shared repositories, bound branches: for example, with a branch A > bound to branch B, a commit is first pushed on branch B, and if > successfull, applied to A; for centralized worflows, this makes things > easier). I honestly do not know if this is significant. bzr claims its > merge capability is better: I do not know if this is true, or if that > matters at all. > > I would rather discuss those than "bzr is tied to linux", because I > don't think they are based on accurate or recent informations. As I > said, I have bzr imports of scipy and scikits, and I could easily to > the same for hg, make them available for everybody to play with. > > David > _______________________________________________ > Numpy-discussion mailing list > Numpy-discussion@scipy.org > http://projects.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion _______________________________________________ Numpy-discussion mailing list Numpy-discussion@scipy.org http://projects.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
