From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Stephen J. Turnbull" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: On the subject of Git, Bazaar, and the future of Emacs development Date: Mon, 01 Apr 2013 15:36:10 +0900 Message-ID: <87fvzaahb9.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> References: <87ehf1cwc4.fsf@maru.md5i.com> <20130331220136.GA16863@saturn> <20130401070006.1b17508d3c3c69b69ac22bc7@gmail.com> <20130331234002.GC16863@saturn> <87hajr9iqy.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> <83r4iu3idy.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1364798186 19652 80.91.229.3 (1 Apr 2013 06:36:26 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 1 Apr 2013 06:36:26 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Apr 01 08:36:54 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 1UMYMN-0006l3-Eo for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 01 Apr 2013 08:36:51 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:36142 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UMYLy-0002Rp-My for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 01 Apr 2013 02:36:26 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:45175) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UMYLt-0002Rj-Lk for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 01 Apr 2013 02:36:25 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UMYLr-0006O0-NU for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 01 Apr 2013 02:36:21 -0400 Original-Received: from mgmt2.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp ([130.158.97.224]:38672) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UMYLq-0006N2-3o; Mon, 01 Apr 2013 02:36:18 -0400 Original-Received: from uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp (uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp [130.158.99.156]) by mgmt2.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 75B8C97086E; Mon, 1 Apr 2013 15:36:10 +0900 (JST) Original-Received: by uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 3A0AE1A3D97; Mon, 1 Apr 2013 15:36:10 +0900 (JST) In-Reply-To: <83r4iu3idy.fsf@gnu.org> X-Mailer: VM undefined under 21.5 (beta32) "habanero" b0d40183ac79 XEmacs Lucid (x86_64-unknown-linux) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6.x X-Received-From: 130.158.97.224 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:158505 Archived-At: Eli Zaretskii writes: > Then why did XEmacs choose Mercurial, and did not switch even now? The main reason was that Mike (who had used Mercurial heavily on some other projects) beat me to getting a reasonably complete conversion (which is quite broken in some ways, but it almost never matters even for exercising an idle curiosity, and it's never been a hindrance to real work). Several people expressed a a preference for the Mercurial CLI, and at least one guy worked for Sun where Mercurial was the "official" VCS at that time. OTOH, at that time, it wasn't clear to me that git was going to be more featureful than Mercurial so I didn't fight it. Right now Mercurial is a well-maintained tool with some ongoing development whose only real downside[1] is that it isn't the market leader. So we stick with what we've got. If a project is going to change (but for Emacs, my money is on "not this year", Richard seems pretty adamant), what I wrote about git being the market leader would matter in choosing a successor. Footnotes: [1] I hate the way "named branches" are implemented in Mercurial, but I find Mercurial queues to be an adequate substitute for git-style branching for most work.