From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: =?utf-8?Q?=C3=93scar_Fuentes?= Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: bzr vs. git repository Date: Sat, 01 Jan 2011 13:36:36 +0100 Message-ID: <87bp403inf.fsf@telefonica.net> References: <83zkrlosry.fsf@gnu.org> <20110101.105445.492149087.wl@gnu.org> <83wrmportz.fsf@gnu.org> <20110101.120420.360108937.wl@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1293885425 17328 80.91.229.12 (1 Jan 2011 12:37:05 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 1 Jan 2011 12:37:05 +0000 (UTC) To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Jan 01 13:37:00 2011 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 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1PZ0hc-0001Gg-0U for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 01 Jan 2011 13:36:56 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:59057 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PZ0hb-0001Ro-HB for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 01 Jan 2011 07:36:55 -0500 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=53614 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PZ0hX-0001RZ-2E for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 01 Jan 2011 07:36:52 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PZ0hV-0000DN-RX for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 01 Jan 2011 07:36:50 -0500 Original-Received: from lo.gmane.org ([80.91.229.12]:47010) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PZ0hV-0000DG-Kq for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 01 Jan 2011 07:36:49 -0500 Original-Received: from list by lo.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1PZ0hT-0001BU-GF for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 01 Jan 2011 13:36:47 +0100 Original-Received: from 212.red-88-24-214.staticip.rima-tde.net ([88.24.214.212]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sat, 01 Jan 2011 13:36:47 +0100 Original-Received: from ofv by 212.red-88-24-214.staticip.rima-tde.net with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sat, 01 Jan 2011 13:36:47 +0100 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Original-Lines: 24 Original-X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: 212.red-88-24-214.staticip.rima-tde.net User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:f3CYpN1GOCjI/YnB1GVnqOYMBkU= X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) 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:134109 Archived-At: Werner LEMBERG writes: >> Posting this on the Bazaar mailing list would be TRT, IMO. It's >> always a Good Thing to get the developers think about getting their >> software more efficient. But posting this here can never make bzr >> hog less of the bandwidth, so I don't see why would you do this >> except to tease. > > RMS explicitly has asked for that info a few months ago, and only now > I was able to provide it for various reasons. Since the discussion > then happened on this very list, I found it appropriate to post it > here too. I did quite a few resource usage comparisions back on the days before the transition to bzr. They were posted on the bzr ml. The response from the developers was "bzr is fast enough and we wont devote more time to performance enhancements." However, the data was enough motivation for one or two developers to tweak some parts of bzr, with visible results. The impression I got is that further improvements would be very hard to achieve. > I suggest to forget the whole issue. Yes, please.