From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Teemu Likonen Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: On the subject of Git, Bazaar, and the future of Emacs development Date: Tue, 02 Apr 2013 19:21:38 +0300 Message-ID: <874nfozywd.fsf@mithlond.arda> References: <20130401203140.171a6d45@anarchist> <20130402145457.GA3278@acm.acm> <87bo9xynhu.fsf@mithlond.arda> <20130402114508.1116119c@anarchist> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature" X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1364919726 16636 80.91.229.3 (2 Apr 2013 16:22:06 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 2 Apr 2013 16:22:06 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Alan Mackenzie , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Barry Warsaw Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Apr 02 18:22:31 2013 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1UN3ye-0004uy-UP for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 02 Apr 2013 18:22:29 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:37103 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UN3yG-0007gw-6t for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 02 Apr 2013 12:22:04 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:33316) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UN3y9-0007Y1-Q3 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 02 Apr 2013 12:22:00 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UN3y5-00006z-H5 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 02 Apr 2013 12:21:57 -0400 Original-Received: from mta-out.inet.fi ([195.156.147.13]:42972 helo=jenni1.inet.fi) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UN3y5-00006I-7q for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 02 Apr 2013 12:21:53 -0400 Original-Received: from mithlond.arda (84.251.134.110) by jenni1.inet.fi (8.5.140.03) id 508712A00A7C9F80; Tue, 2 Apr 2013 19:21:42 +0300 Original-Received: from dtw by mithlond.arda with local (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1UN3xu-00056d-4S; Tue, 02 Apr 2013 19:21:42 +0300 In-Reply-To: <20130402114508.1116119c@anarchist> (Barry Warsaw's message of "Tue, 2 Apr 2013 11:45:08 -0400") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3 (gnu/linux) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6.x X-Received-From: 195.156.147.13 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:158547 Archived-At: --=-=-= Content-Type: text/plain Barry Warsaw [2013-04-02 11:45:08 -0400] wrote: > On Apr 02, 2013, at 06:13 PM, Teemu Likonen wrote: >> There have been ideas why Git is inferior to its competitors. Yet it >> became the leader. > > Network effects are powerful, but don't always lead to the best > choice. True, I guess. But many large projects use Git and I believe they are competent programmers and people who know what they want. Do you think that Git is wrong tool for many people who are using it now? > OTOH, I still suspect that dvcs adoption is miles behind traditional > vcses such as Subversion. Maybe, but among Debian GNU/Linux users Git surpassed Subversion's popularity in the mid 2011. Below is a graph from Debian's automatic popularity contest. It's a "vote" graph which shows if the binary files in the packages have been accessed recently (atime). http://qa.debian.org/popcon-graph.php?packages=git%2Cmercurial%2Cbzr%2Csubversion&show_vote=on&want_legend=on&from_date=2010-01-01&to_date=&hlght_date=&date_fmt=%25Y-%25m&beenhere=1 The "install" graph looks the same. This is just about machines that have packages installed. http://qa.debian.org/popcon-graph.php?packages=git%2Cmercurial%2Cbzr%2Csubversion&show_installed=on&want_legend=on&from_date=2010-05-01&to_date=&hlght_date=&date_fmt=%25Y-%25m&beenhere=1 Here's again the "vote" graph but only for bzr and mercurial packages. It seems that Bzr's trend is subtle downhill but it's too early to tell for sure. http://qa.debian.org/popcon-graph.php?packages=mercurial%2Cbzr&show_vote=on&want_legend=on&from_date=2010-05-01&to_date=&hlght_date=&date_fmt=%25Y-%25m&beenhere=1 --=-=-= Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux) iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJRWwWSAAoJEHGdadMkU5RQt50QAILtc1sp78alFrXlZFeM9HaE NX9mM5f8o7uEYP7WFZ+s/zdnDDUEtcPvDlUOM2FSZKPanuDuUmPm2iaP2tQau0Nb zndXab1KJQ8YfVcHQIWNMlNITsIlpRfSB9lPL6og9V6MJk5Xw+K2oex9kRC0gdyW BE+dQWm5QT4FduKmpj6qLihFdPStKAEjY0gQOeFmZcQ28h1HiqacZ3L98h+mmbNH /hAZVGPXtc1BiTqEbCkZFVCJ+LrgqefwFLn6lMPLiurfcqY0/oOEgptMdPATniDZ 4QE5qJjPX5UzipCz59XQMymv31ReWO2+l1KoIrsLNwu9s/bW61wB2OQhOxMsk75v w6Oxw8mK8oJQslXUWIiuqgBtNb/ZBDejwpST8quLpM2hPkZKgxQTC7ZNFrGB/sOO T3IHRscswnwEkTeFmlQjRzOT6Kv7xnEu70NZMJm4Wqpl5d8jxB4UZvsc+4ifvVrI zdeaHrTNF+g1Cbv3DnU7nWLHDgzikgn4ajX9lJjNbgxljit/wFC7THdjkQqakJGn srhiZiv2mEZAqOP0oumxOhAVFKXd7Wr/yZQfCqp/ylfWq8OiQ6eoSqrtouXXwsns rv3G14Scf9HPURMi/YVqiTiaz1QoQbZzzOWlWkLURRog5fCSPpCf/pDghoYlc5PQ eayvNK4Adcx5277bGqtP =yD2I -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-=-=--