From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Mike Mattie Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Emacs Bazaar repository Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2008 12:31:34 -0700 Message-ID: <20080318123134.33c9639b@reforged> References: <87skyvse7k.fsf@xmission.com> <86ejae96t4.fsf@lola.quinscape.zz> <47DA3601.3040507@arbash-meinel.com> <87r6ecsww7.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> <200803180148.m2I1m0dB003724@sallyv1.ics.uci.edu> <87fxuoznk2.fsf@red-bean.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Sig_/DgUZXpkXd=hpTuh=ToTuV+G"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=PGP-SHA1 X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1205868865 16047 80.91.229.12 (18 Mar 2008 19:34:25 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2008 19:34:25 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Karl Fogel To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Mar 18 20:34:47 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 1Jbha4-0002fa-FZ for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 18 Mar 2008 20:34:41 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JbhZU-0006wH-He for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 18 Mar 2008 15:34:04 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1JbhZ5-0006V2-RS for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 18 Mar 2008 15:33:39 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1JbhZ4-0006Tg-NZ for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 18 Mar 2008 15:33:39 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JbhZ4-0006TO-EA for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 18 Mar 2008 15:33:38 -0400 Original-Received: from wa-out-1112.google.com ([209.85.146.180]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1JbhZ3-0003ZB-Uw for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 18 Mar 2008 15:33:38 -0400 Original-Received: by wa-out-1112.google.com with SMTP id k34so34810wah.10 for ; Tue, 18 Mar 2008 12:33:24 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:in-reply-to:references:x-mailer:mime-version:content-type; bh=A1vdyAMpXfiqxoVAMmUU9Okt0FpxZAJSf3cFhmdkofE=; b=uryK++73DaRpfGOoAhSIX7f6Kk2JgB7ec8A4fSQOAm7Jasq+ULIhyszHCAf6GwCU/aj0cfgzoQ63mPa0JckG8QNNTBH0DxUs2CEyZmo6/ag/xg7rL8tFvILLJjtph5pTw1OQxiPZ/9UOwz25h81taYwi0ELQ5+xhnAQOoXc1y/A= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:in-reply-to:references:x-mailer:mime-version:content-type; b=iPxq6n+C0Opt5WELNOwl72NEiUq30Ia+9H0RnSf9iG7hsm+nEnEI+eqkHUyzfq1gEX4KYu+Eh2jnbdyYMHUhLGUxRMA+TZvktnXmLbAmd84llLdE2F9asGXNG0MroliYnLs0HH4DnxVedec5CmOv5C+D4bNf8oo2Dcu71q369s8= Original-Received: by 10.115.106.7 with SMTP id i7mr2391536wam.18.1205868803754; Tue, 18 Mar 2008 12:33:23 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: from reforged ( [71.217.206.83]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id m30sm26912218wag.21.2008.03.18.12.33.22 (version=SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Tue, 18 Mar 2008 12:33:23 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <87fxuoznk2.fsf@red-bean.com> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.0.2 (GTK+ 2.12.5; i686-pc-linux-gnu) X-detected-kernel: by monty-python.gnu.org: Linux 2.6 (newer, 2) 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:92921 Archived-At: --Sig_/DgUZXpkXd=hpTuh=ToTuV+G Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue, 18 Mar 2008 00:03:09 -0400 Karl Fogel wrote: > dhruva writes: > > With lengthy discussions having taken place on this SCM issue, what > > are we waiting for? Are there really any concrete plans to move to a > > dSCM or are we just wasting talking about features and shortcomings > > of each tool. Any outcome of ESR study? >=20 > I think you may have missed the news :-). >=20 > We decided on bzr, which in practice seems to mean "some people are > seriously testing bzr, and once we have a good conversion and are > satisfied we can get work done, someone will install it on savannah > and that repository will be the new master". >=20 > All of the DVCSs seem good. No one marshalled any compelling > arguments in favor of one versus the other on technical grounds, and > all other things being equal, RMS (and maybe some others, perhaps > including Yidong and Stefan?) preferred bzr because it is a GNU > project. All of them seem good from their press; until you use them and realize some scale, most don't. When darcs was put forward as a candidate it was clear that there was far more googling and e-mailing going on than testing. Now that people are actually trying them out some reality will filter back = in. You can tell that progress is being made because the strange metaphors, fur= ious hand-waving, and war stories have been replaced with _numbers_, and some sa= d faces. There are three choices from here: 1. Backup, demand real testing and trails, make a new choice. (not very political) 2. The choice is already made, so fix bzr. May involve a complete re-design if the algorithms/structures are not designed to efficiently process com= mon case access patterns (log etc.). 3. Let the issue die quietly because there is not enough man-power to divert from Emacs to bzr (who wants to volunteer?), continue using cvs indefinitely without rescinding the declaration to use bzr. The GNU project is hoping for #2 as they want a real contender to git. The numbers now being produced show why very clearly.=20 For the GNU project that may be a very strategic choice in hind-sight if #2 pans out.=20 Nobody has been press-ganged so #2 is really not "terrible", but Emacs has clearly been volunteered for bzr work, or the conversion has been postponed indefinitely. It's not my decision, and I am not making a position here either way. I just hope putting the three choices in plain print will save some electricity and mental band-with.=20 Anyone who really groks the three options I wrote won't reply, because it is simply the state of things, and how things turns out is a individual choice for each developer of how they will spend their time, which is why GNU does things like #2. > The above is a summary of what I take to be the current state of > things. My personal opinions: I'm also happy with bzr, and would be > equally happy with any of the usual suspects among free software > DVCS. I just hope we can switch the master soon. >=20 > -Karl >=20 >=20 --Sig_/DgUZXpkXd=hpTuh=ToTuV+G Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFH4BiWdfRchrkBInkRAlWhAKCVWVy12IyYE/+jAPZuSCUqeTjoJwCgj1vB V2U1Q/5zghwrieriJpaayBc= =C5pj -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_/DgUZXpkXd=hpTuh=ToTuV+G--