From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Juanma Barranquero" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Emacs Bazaar repository Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2008 15:49:47 +0100 Message-ID: References: <87skyvse7k.fsf@xmission.com> <200803180148.m2I1m0dB003724@sallyv1.ics.uci.edu> <87fxuoznk2.fsf@red-bean.com> <87wsnzi7z0.fsf@bzg.ath.cx> <87y78e4xoz.fsf@bzg.ath.cx> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1205938212 29316 80.91.229.12 (19 Mar 2008 14:50:12 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2008 14:50:12 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Emacs Devel To: Bastien Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Mar 19 15:50:41 2008 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from mail-forward.uio.no ([129.240.10.42]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1Jbzcm-0005kP-KJ for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 19 Mar 2008 15:50:40 +0100 Original-Received: from mail-mx4.uio.no ([129.240.10.45]) by pat.uio.no with esmtp (Exim 4.67) (envelope-from ) id 1JbzcD-0002Qn-AA for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 19 Mar 2008 15:50:05 +0100 Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by mail-mx4.uio.no with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.67) (envelope-from ) id 1Jbzc4-00046b-QV for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 19 Mar 2008 15:50:05 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Jbzc3-0006rw-Jm for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 19 Mar 2008 10:49:55 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Jbzby-0006pA-MA for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 19 Mar 2008 10:49:50 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Jbzbw-0006n8-Ul for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 19 Mar 2008 10:49:50 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Jbzbw-0006mz-LA for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 19 Mar 2008 10:49:48 -0400 Original-Received: from rn-out-0910.google.com ([64.233.170.190]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1Jbzbw-0005T3-FY for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 19 Mar 2008 10:49:48 -0400 Original-Received: by rn-out-0910.google.com with SMTP id i6so310181rng.2 for ; Wed, 19 Mar 2008 07:49:47 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; bh=LekftL66qDbAb/RFEK76BROWLWJQU0RY5vcOBR6PK7E=; b=mc10sqIIrqrQY4BKqVDYFV/Cu99MB8lQAjjslYRJfh5jKoQtoHCgt2FAwPmD0hKhIzn1FF+qzrgdWb/OorOpeXw96pmbH1g3ttJTWLc9O6KNnn+WDZnEm1B8MujjqKjTOaVTxYBAK/JCiCLbrDWEiGAJZi8vBdiL1tS2cN9zIL8= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=ZlTtm01sI5HrV54OiJXtHKEh73eRL2fiezMUKc7oDb6rzx5brU/9U1I9BCrid7e7XCLNJevvKBgxypHmOCJgrFJ+rsTJfm6xwvy1WTdZKr/OdZySd/E8wAU+MEm9282/re32OK/ETfGbabe2tAKc/x0ybwTUWR8WbKyemg2eo4Q= Original-Received: by 10.114.57.1 with SMTP id f1mr1430086waa.78.1205938187219; Wed, 19 Mar 2008 07:49:47 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: by 10.114.166.20 with HTTP; Wed, 19 Mar 2008 07:49:47 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <87y78e4xoz.fsf@bzg.ath.cx> Content-Disposition: inline X-detected-kernel: by monty-python.gnu.org: Linux 2.6 (newer, 2) 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 X-UiO-SPF-Received: Received-SPF: pass (mail-mx4.uio.no: domain of gnu.org designates 199.232.76.165 as permitted sender) client-ip=199.232.76.165; envelope-from=emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org; helo=lists.gnu.org; X-UiO-Spam-info: not spam, SpamAssassin (score=-1.0, required=5.0, autolearn=disabled, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1) X-UiO-Scanned: EC6371B50982B17B63F99CA424A72E968B6A0E45 X-UiO-SR-test: 9FD3B3A4CAE833CC0EEE113E571E371AB20952B3 X-UiO-SPAM-Test: remote_host: 199.232.76.165 spam_score: -9 maxlevel 200 minaction 2 bait 0 mail/h: 15 total 43732 max/h 424 blacklist 0 greylist 0 ratelimit 0 Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:92979 Archived-At: On Wed, Mar 19, 2008 at 3:04 PM, Bastien wrote: > They are not equivalent in terms of performance, but I think the > assumption was more precisely that all dVCS are equivalent in terms of > their ability to adapt to any workflow. This assumption is true IMO. Performance often influences workflow. Also, that every dVCS is flexible enough to adapt does not mean that all workflows are equally practical or easy to follow with any of them. Were this not the Emacs project, determining the workflow and choosing the tool that best matches it would seem preferable to trying to shoehorn this or that tool to the desired workflow. > One of the benefits of using a dVCS is that you can envision different > workflows. If everybody were okay with bzr then there would be no point > in trying to imagine other workflows before using the new dVCS. But > since bzr has some annoying shortcomings, maybe it is useful to be sure > that everyone wants to stick to the current workflow before avoiding bzr > because of its inability to preserve this workflow... I don't think we're at that point yet. We're at the point were normal operations are slow because of the Emacs' repository size and long history. At least, that's what it seems from the comments so far. > One of the shortcomings of the current workflow is this one: some piece > of code in Emacs is actively developped outside of the Emacs CVS (Gnus, > ERC, Org, etc.) Since these pieces are also part of Emacs, any change > on them in the Emacs CVS requires someone to report the changes in the > local, independant repository of the module. This is double work, and > such energy could be spared with the "Lieutenant" topology previously > described. Agreed. But there are relatively few, very specific parts of Emacs that suffer this problem: gnus, org, etc. > I propose to think about what a _distributed_ VCS > would be really useful for as a collective tool, in hope that such a > discussion might give directions in the evaluation of bzr. That kind of discussion should be independent of the tool, shouldn't it? Juanma