From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Lennart Borgman (gmail)" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel,gmane.comp.version-control.bazaar-ng.general Subject: Re: Emacs Bazaar repository Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2008 15:29:27 +0100 Message-ID: <47DA8BC7.9050600@gmail.com> References: <87skyvse7k.fsf@xmission.com> <86ejae96t4.fsf@lola.quinscape.zz> <47DA7943.6090806@gmail.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1205505113 17048 80.91.229.12 (14 Mar 2008 14:31:53 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2008 14:31:53 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Eli Zaretskii , emacs-devel@gnu.org, bazaar@lists.canonical.com, schwab@suse.de To: Matthieu Moy Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Mar 14 15:32:18 2008 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1JaAx6-000642-UA for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 14 Mar 2008 15:32:09 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JaAwX-0006kQ-NV for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 14 Mar 2008 10:31:33 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1JaAun-0004sY-Kp for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 14 Mar 2008 10:29:45 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1JaAum-0004rv-RJ for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 14 Mar 2008 10:29:45 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JaAum-0004rg-Hu for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 14 Mar 2008 10:29:44 -0400 Original-Received: from ch-smtp02.sth.basefarm.net ([80.76.149.213]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1JaAui-0002DC-Iq; Fri, 14 Mar 2008 10:29:40 -0400 Original-Received: from c83-254-148-228.bredband.comhem.se ([83.254.148.228]:63881 helo=[127.0.0.1]) by ch-smtp02.sth.basefarm.net with esmtp (Exim 4.68) (envelope-from ) id 1JaAue-00051j-9W; Fri, 14 Mar 2008 15:29:37 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.8.1.9) Gecko/20071031 Thunderbird/2.0.0.9 Mnenhy/0.7.5.666 In-Reply-To: X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 080313-0, 2008-03-13), Outbound message X-Antivirus-Status: Clean X-Originating-IP: 83.254.148.228 X-Scan-Result: No virus found in message 1JaAue-00051j-9W. X-Scan-Signature: ch-smtp02.sth.basefarm.net 1JaAue-00051j-9W 917c2d308f680a11d776b20d6d48715a X-detected-kernel: by monty-python.gnu.org: Linux 2.6? (barebone, rare!) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:92560 gmane.comp.version-control.bazaar-ng.general:38579 Archived-At: Matthieu Moy wrote: > "Lennart Borgman (gmail)" writes: > >>> If Mercurial had the ability to truly support multiple branches in >>> the same folder (with out requiring me to merge all branches before I >>> can pull - pull works only if there is a single tip/branch), I would >>> have preferred it mainly because it just needs PYTHON and nothing else >>> (GIT needs PERL and SHELL). >> How did they do that? It needs both perl and sh? Is there really any >> perl programmer who writes code that way? > > The core git is in C, and designed to be used in scripts. > > Then, UI commands have usually been prototyped in shell-script, but > there's an ongoing effort to re-write them in C (mostly because > shell-scripts sucks when it comes to robustness and portability). > > Some commands have been written in perl instead of C or shell, > probably because they have been written by people who like perl. Thanks Matthieu, for the explanation. My point was also that perl is far more portable then sh (beside beeing more powerful as a scripting language).