From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: =?UTF-8?Q?Jordi_Guti=C3=A9rrez_Hermoso?= Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: On the subject of Git, Bazaar, and the future of Emacs development Date: Wed, 27 Mar 2013 10:52:07 -0400 Message-ID: References: <87ehf1cwc4.fsf@maru.md5i.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1364395934 29647 80.91.229.3 (27 Mar 2013 14:52:14 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 27 Mar 2013 14:52:14 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Michael Welsh Duggan Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Mar 27 15:52:41 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 1UKriS-0007Mp-PH for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 27 Mar 2013 15:52:40 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:48943 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UKri4-0006z4-Iq for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 27 Mar 2013 10:52:16 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:37252) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UKrhy-0006xu-7I for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 27 Mar 2013 10:52:12 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UKrhw-0002Vd-1w for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 27 Mar 2013 10:52:10 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-ie0-x234.google.com ([2607:f8b0:4001:c03::234]:36811) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UKrhv-0002VQ-Sl for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 27 Mar 2013 10:52:07 -0400 Original-Received: by mail-ie0-f180.google.com with SMTP id a11so9991939iee.39 for ; Wed, 27 Mar 2013 07:52:07 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:x-received:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=tV/3Z+YXA3f3RvinGQwdM994px+TAW9OEkqBaZ6DpRk=; b=c9bhy4ZCJPDosQpqNFtTVagTxrryBcN5PT1f0tF800Z4v5sl4hTJFu4l7PWh00Qt/K Gjhgm2bauo/1w9rp0sBk29AS2F+rtibQotNQCdTmNwtT55C+O5XDj40ggWJOrEwHcbp5 9gs+UnAEYKK5+Bdsae3NdIhyIiWP/0OLZV/fvQ9i5uAZgoypv4XjA4GSUX/Qmja5i0OD u7njkQe7AUSoz+2j1MK/5yGC6cMP8Vt+BWKA7iUOeNn9l5l4ZRAiLUL1N0ijTMuFDUr5 uL1/t7ogwiwtzcAmcGsnFNGQPBUbW7NTM9TFXWuG7+FglKvpyAyJm+JdMwap+Rrv6qFJ j55A== X-Received: by 10.50.37.236 with SMTP id b12mr4390082igk.42.1364395927218; Wed, 27 Mar 2013 07:52:07 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: by 10.64.34.234 with HTTP; Wed, 27 Mar 2013 07:52:07 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <87ehf1cwc4.fsf@maru.md5i.com> X-Google-Sender-Auth: EMhZ8JDipKFrlLnVIoDss0m5_7I X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Error: Malformed IPv6 address (bad octet value). X-Received-From: 2607:f8b0:4001:c03::234 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:158307 Archived-At: On 27 March 2013 00:15, Michael Welsh Duggan wrote: > "John Wiegley" writes: > >> We have often debated the merits of Git vs. Bazaar, and which one the GNU >> project should use for Emacs development. I think now is an appropriate time >> to revisit this decision. > > I see these Git versus Bazaar arguments pop up every now and then on > this forum. I must admit my experience with Git has been better than > that with Bazaar, but I have to ask, why isn't Mercurial being > considered? From a license perspective, Mercurial is GPLv2+, while Git > is GPLv2. I found Mercurial's command-line UI much easier to learn and > understand than Git, and I believe the two are fairly comparable in > power. We are happily using Mercurial in GNU Octave, and I heartily recommend it to anyone, especially to GNU. The Mercurial community is dedicated to free software as evidenced by the GPLv2 *or later* that hg has and git doesn't, as well as things such as http://selenic.com/pipermail/mercurial/2011-March/037593.html Half of the things in git's wishlist here are already in Mercurial: https://github.com/peff/git/wiki/SoC-2012-Ideas Namely: git log --follow support, improved parallelism (in hg 2.6, nearing release), git instaweb --serve, and "published" and "secret" commits. Mercurial is overall comparable in features to git, of comparable speed, and sometimes faster, e.g. compare the cloning time of these two versions of gnulib: time git clone git://git.sv.gnu.org/gnulib.git time hg clone http://hg.savannah.gnu.org/hgweb/octave/gnulib-hg Both are on the same server, so at least that's not a factor. Note that the hg link is actually web browsable. Same url for browsing as for cloning! I very much heartily endorse hg for Emacs. But sadly, this is a minority opinion. I do want Emacs to move away from bzr. If you think my Mercurial advocacy is lunacy, at least consider me an ally in moving Emacs away from bzr. At least nowadays hg-git works well for me, and I'll maintain an hg mirror for Emacs for anyone who wants to use it. > Or maybe I should just shut up before I start a new round of endless > DCVS discussion... Too late? :-) - Jordi G. H.