From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Tassilo Horn Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: It's not yet time to anoint git, or anything else Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2008 15:54:36 +0100 Message-ID: <87k5msth03.fsf@member.fsf.org> References: <20080102132458.387D9830B03@snark.thyrsus.com> <86prwk2udp.fsf@lifelogs.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1199285795 2236 80.91.229.12 (2 Jan 2008 14:56:35 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2008 14:56:35 +0000 (UTC) To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Jan 02 15:56:54 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 1JA51Y-0007uy-6p for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 02 Jan 2008 15:56:52 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JA51C-00010K-2O for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 02 Jan 2008 09:56:30 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1JA4zR-0007Vf-Vp for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 02 Jan 2008 09:54:42 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1JA4zQ-0007UU-7l for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 02 Jan 2008 09:54:41 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JA4zQ-0007UL-0O for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 02 Jan 2008 09:54:40 -0500 Original-Received: from out4.smtp.messagingengine.com ([66.111.4.28]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1JA4zP-0002uo-IA for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 02 Jan 2008 09:54:39 -0500 Original-Received: from compute2.internal (compute2.internal [10.202.2.42]) by out1.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AE5A95E621 for ; Wed, 2 Jan 2008 09:54:38 -0500 (EST) Original-Received: from heartbeat1.messagingengine.com ([10.202.2.160]) by compute2.internal (MEProxy); Wed, 02 Jan 2008 09:54:38 -0500 X-Sasl-enc: 7bPAxm6m2aWq6cI25gYTM9R5XgIdlp9Vrpb3CVAd6NW3 1199285678 Original-Received: from baldur (dslb-084-063-049-086.pools.arcor-ip.net [84.63.49.86]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 06FF9B12F for ; Wed, 2 Jan 2008 09:54:37 -0500 (EST) Mail-Followup-To: emacs-devel@gnu.org In-Reply-To: <86prwk2udp.fsf@lifelogs.com> (Ted Zlatanov's message of "Wed, 02 Jan 2008 08:07:46 -0600") User-Agent: Gnus/5.110007 (No Gnus v0.7) Emacs/23.0.50 (gnu/linux) X-detected-kernel: by monty-python.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. 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:85909 Archived-At: Ted Zlatanov writes: Hi Ted, > ESR> But I think it's worth noting that pretty much all the good > ESR> things being said about git apply equally to other DVCSes such as > ESR> Mercurial, bzr, monotone, darcs, and Codeville. All of these > ESR> have very similar basic models based on commit-before-merge and > ESR> push/pull operations. > > Has there ever been an ELisp-based VCS? Should we at least consider > it? The advantages are significant for this group of developers, and > it would certainly benefit other users. The major disadvantage > (besides having to write the code), I imagine, is incompatibility with > other VCSs, and that can be addressed by a bridge to CVS/Git/Arch/etc > as deemed appropriate (similar to the git-svn bridge). I'd say that this would be a monster-job where we simply don't have the man-power to do that. And I don't see what those significant advantages would be. Could you elaborate on that? IMO an elisp solution would bring at least those drawbacks: - huge effort to write and maintain it - since we get it right and reliable it may take very long - worse performance than a highly optimized C solution - since emacs is single-threaded any VC operation would block emacs So my opinion is that we'd be better off to use one of the excellent existing dVCSs. Bye, Tassilo