I think the main advantage of a DVCS is that it allows many many people to make changes to a project and to integrate those changes in a non-insane way. Given that R as a very restricted list of people who actually make changes to the source, it doesn't seem that something like git or Hg would provide a major advantage. If the people on that list are happy with SVN then there's not much else to say. However, if it were thought that maybe we want more people submitting patches/making changes, then perhaps it might make more sense to move to a DVCS.
I use git for everything mainly because it's *fast* and it has much better tools for viewing changes/patches and revision history. For example, 'git bisect' has allowed me track down bugs that would have been very painful for me because I'm not intimately familiar with the entire R source code. -roger On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 1:14 PM, Seth Falcon <s...@userprimary.net> wrote: > On 5/26/10 4:16 AM, Gabor Grothendieck wrote: >> >> Note that one can also use any of the dvcs systems without actually >> moving from svn by using the dvcs (or associated extension/addon) as >> an svn client or by using it on an svn checkout. > > FWIW, I have been using git for several years now as my vsc of choice and > use it for all svn-backed projects (R included) via git-svn. > > Some of the things I like: > > - Being able to organize changes in local commits that can be revised, > reordered, rebased prior to publishing. Once I got in the habit of working > this way, I simply can't imagine going back. > > - Having quick access to full repository history without network > access/delay. Features for searching change history are more powerful (or > easier for me to use) and I have found that useful as well. > > - This may not be true any longer with more recent svn servers/clients, but > aside form the initial repo clone, working via git-svn was noticeably faster > than straight svn client (!) -- I think related to how the tools organize > the working copy and how many fstat calls they make. > > - I find the log reviewing functionality much better suited to reviewing > changes. > > > + seth > > -- > Seth Falcon | @sfalcon | http://userprimary.net/ > > ______________________________________________ > R-devel@r-project.org mailing list > https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel > -- Roger D. Peng | http://www.biostat.jhsph.edu/~rpeng/ ______________________________________________ R-devel@r-project.org mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
