From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: dhruva Newsgroups: gmane.comp.version-control.bazaar-ng.general,gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Emacs repository benchmark: bzr and git Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2008 21:35:30 +0530 Message-ID: References: <20080318154316.GA6242@mithlond.arda.local> <47DFE4EA.5000600@gmail.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1205856361 16001 80.91.229.12 (18 Mar 2008 16:06:01 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2008 16:06:01 +0000 (UTC) Cc: bazaar@lists.canonical.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: "Lennart Borgman (gmail)" Original-X-From: bazaar-bounces@lists.canonical.com Tue Mar 18 17:06:30 2008 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvbg-bazaar-ng@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from chlorine.canonical.com ([91.189.94.204]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1JbeKN-0005T7-7m for gcvbg-bazaar-ng@m.gmane.org; Tue, 18 Mar 2008 17:06:15 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=chlorine.canonical.com) by chlorine.canonical.com with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1JbeJn-00067L-Lq; Tue, 18 Mar 2008 16:05:39 +0000 Original-Received: from ti-out-0910.google.com ([209.85.142.189]) by chlorine.canonical.com with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1JbeJh-00066B-9s for bazaar@lists.canonical.com; Tue, 18 Mar 2008 16:05:33 +0000 Original-Received: by ti-out-0910.google.com with SMTP id j2so2136682tid.4 for ; Tue, 18 Mar 2008 09:05:30 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: by 10.110.31.11 with SMTP id e11mr298236tie.56.1205856330060; Tue, 18 Mar 2008 09:05:30 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: by 10.110.3.13 with HTTP; Tue, 18 Mar 2008 09:05:30 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <47DFE4EA.5000600@gmail.com> Content-Disposition: inline X-BeenThere: bazaar@lists.canonical.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.8 Precedence: list List-Id: bazaar discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: bazaar-bounces@lists.canonical.com Errors-To: bazaar-bounces@lists.canonical.com Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.comp.version-control.bazaar-ng.general:38920 gmane.emacs.devel:92893 Archived-At: Hi, I am using the latest bzr from their repository to access emacs repo. I am not seeing any performance improvements. If we need to pull from some other tree for doing performance tests, please let us know. I even went to #bzr channel on irc.freenode.org to see if someone could answer my questions, I did not see enough noise or response. Anyway, I will try again, it might be due to timezone issues... To the emacs maintainers and decision makers: What more information is required to convince bzr is not the right tool at the present moment? Every tests seems to reveal limitations in the tool compared to available alternatives and yet I hear some say that the decision has been made to use bzr. I have not missed out a single discussion related to this thread and am quite verbosely involved. I personally do not see a single mail which can tilt the scale in favor of bzr except it is part of GNU project. -dhruva