From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Jari Aalto Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: What a modern collaboration toolkit looks like Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2008 19:45:17 +0200 Organization: Private Message-ID: <4pd9g15e.fsf@blue.sea.net> References: <20071230122217.3CA84830B9A@snark.thyrsus.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1200764781 3593 80.91.229.12 (19 Jan 2008 17:46:21 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2008 17:46:21 +0000 (UTC) Cc: jaalto@cante.net To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Jan 19 18:46:39 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 1JGHm5-00024E-33 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 19 Jan 2008 18:46:33 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JGHlg-0005LI-0u for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 19 Jan 2008 12:46:08 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1JGHlb-0005L3-Gb for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 19 Jan 2008 12:46:03 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1JGHla-0005Kq-Ls for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 19 Jan 2008 12:46:02 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JGHla-0005Kn-Fq for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 19 Jan 2008 12:46:02 -0500 Original-Received: from main.gmane.org ([80.91.229.2] helo=ciao.gmane.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1JGHla-0003wS-11 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 19 Jan 2008 12:46:02 -0500 Original-Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1JGHlR-00038w-95 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 19 Jan 2008 17:45:53 +0000 Original-Received: from a91-155-188-244.elisa-laajakaista.fi ([91.155.188.244]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sat, 19 Jan 2008 17:45:53 +0000 Original-Received: from jari.aalto by a91-155-188-244.elisa-laajakaista.fi with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sat, 19 Jan 2008 17:45:53 +0000 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Original-Lines: 65 Original-X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: a91-155-188-244.elisa-laajakaista.fi User-Agent: Gnus/5.110007 (No Gnus v0.7) Emacs/22.1 (windows-nt) Cancel-Lock: sha1:2SI/FzccrFgAUIXb8uIcDOIbh5U= X-detected-kernel: by monty-python.gnu.org: Linux 2.6, seldom 2.4 (older, 4) 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:87082 Archived-At: * Sun 2007-12-30 Eric Raymond gmane.emacs.devel * Message-Id: 20071230122217.3CA84830B9A@snark.thyrsus.com > > This is a typical modern open-source project. It's not even a > particularly large one -- no more than a dozen core devs, 58 > developers total. Here are the collaborative tools we use every day: > > * Source control with Subversion I saw discussion that a change from CVS to distributed version control is under consideration. To shed a little light to the DCVS scene, here is one of my presentations: http://www.cante.net/~jaalto/doc/version-control-systems.pdf Follow the small knobs "*" and underlined words to find out more information (URL links). SUMMARY The git seems to be overall winner. It's a clear choice for big projects. - Git: phase of development is staggering and in few years the UI/OS compatibility issues are past * The branching and merging "in place" (no separate directories) is thing that excells over any other VCS/DCVS. A Brilliant invention and simple to use. * Vibrant community: ask a question and you get instant answers to anything. * The weak point is UI: it is very complicated. Currently requires very steep learning curve even from users that have prior experience (CVS/SVN stc.) - Bzr seems to take second place. It has a long term progression path and support, very strict code quality and clearly defined development phases. * I estimate that it will improved in two years time to meet needs of almost any user. * Out of the box Central / semi-central / distributed support (much nicer than git's) * The best is UI: it's very smooth, uniform, logical and a CVS/SVN user is immediately at home with it. * Weak point: performance problems with big repositories with lot of old history. These will however be solved soon (1 year; during 2008). Despite the popularity that Hg has been chosen by "Big projects" like OpenJDK etc., I would not incline to recommended it. Reasons: Too slow release schedule, small dev team, unclear roadmap. My observation is based on: * Page 11: "DCVS Release Schedules" * Page 12: "Pace of Development (1)" * Page 13: "Pace of Development (2)" Jari NOTES -------------- VCS = Version Control System (software) git = Git http://git-scm.org bzr = Bazaar http://bazaar-vcs.org hg = Mercurial http://www.selenic.com/mercurial/