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: New sync'd branch Date: Fri, 28 Aug 2009 19:49:53 +0200 Message-ID: References: <83praic5r5.fsf@gnu.org> <83d46gcnsb.fsf@gnu.org> <87ocq0l2hw.fsf@iki.fi> <83ab1kcmi5.fsf@gnu.org> <877hwom4og.fsf@telefonica.net> <873a7bn9rm.fsf@telefonica.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1251481833 16654 80.91.229.12 (28 Aug 2009 17:50:33 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 28 Aug 2009 17:50:33 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: =?UTF-8?Q?=C3=93scar_Fuentes?= Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Aug 28 19:50:26 2009 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 1Mh5ak-0003fa-0K for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 28 Aug 2009 19:50:26 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:40299 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Mh5aj-0005pC-Fj for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 28 Aug 2009 13:50:25 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Mh5ae-0005ol-8O for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 28 Aug 2009 13:50:20 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Mh5aZ-0005jh-EN for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 28 Aug 2009 13:50:19 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=38499 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Mh5aZ-0005jb-A1 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 28 Aug 2009 13:50:15 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-bw0-f222.google.com ([209.85.218.222]:50842) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1Mh5aY-0005LW-Pc for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 28 Aug 2009 13:50:15 -0400 Original-Received: by bwz22 with SMTP id 22so2059994bwz.42 for ; Fri, 28 Aug 2009 10:50:13 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :from:date:message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=BX9Qo2bXZY6nvTX7mO3uFbDzZiguEiQ+tKJAMkVtq+o=; b=qeeQMrChiqn9QE/pYxlkv0e3tayMEKUI35187xjQ14ZFpnclVCHwVEWfOjILvqYtfE o4c7CPGtIBgzpbAZ+Yyy2FeqGhgkrXKVGeXZkyYsXF1KoppZ+3jPSerXqWNnVBSJOCsH 0GX9E1nHAhwbcPJTLO3RgVu/6n1kTlOYjH88g= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=dbhR5s1pghFfM9C643h9PuiBfhVMqYIFUvGS6EIk0HJNxuezykHQam45Tf7Mhna3e/ Ud+80Us456jCQ0jDCPJmwsMIxprWIT4KjKEFEBVklQ8YaZwjlJ4KLUJPmroVdkG6ZubH m2wz8C6fmlfavcO83bODW17jRcOwcjJ2Kw43k= Original-Received: by 10.239.182.158 with SMTP id q30mr130203hbg.23.1251481813180; Fri, 28 Aug 2009 10:50:13 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <873a7bn9rm.fsf@telefonica.net> X-detected-operating-system: by monty-python.gnu.org: GNU/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 Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:114777 Archived-At: On Fri, Aug 28, 2009 at 19:11, =C3=93scar Fuentes wrote: > I say that git's speed is no longer a reason for choosing it on > Windows. Some operations (like initializing a git-svn repo) is orders of > magnitude slower on Windows than on GNU/Linux. Importing a 1000 revs svn > repo took *hours* on Windows, less than a minute on GNU/Linux. bzr > imports it on Windows almost as fast as git on GNU/Linux. Your experience with bzr seems to have been better than mine. Cloning a repo, and doing some normal operations has been much slower with bzr than git. So, if not a reason to use git over bzr (on projects that don't require it, as Emacs will be), it is certainly a factor. AFAIK, it did take months for bzr log to be usable on an Emacs repository... > Why do you hate cygwin and not msys, which is cygwin by other name (and > with not so good maintenance and quality, IMO). I don't really hate Cygwin, I hate *having to use it*; I hate it forcing me into that fake "you're on Unix now" mindset. If some tool uses Cygwin under the hood, at it works fine, fine. > This is like C++ and other gratuitously complex systems: it is difficult > to learn what's important and what's irrelevant or even dangerous. Yes. That does not mean that C++ or other "gratuitously complex systems" are worthless (and I say that as someone who once ago made a living programming in C++ and who does *not* like it). So, if you're saying that git would be better by removing complexity, I agree. But still, some things it does quite well (frankly, switching branches in place is much more intuitive for me that the current "shared repository" thing in bzr, for example). > Learning bzr took me half an hour and I'm productively working with it > since two months ago. bzr does its job and it is out your way. git > requires quite a bit of mastership and knowing lots of things about its > inner workings. I disagree. It only requires that you know about the complexity if you intend to do some specialized things, and the same if true for bzr or any other DVCS. I know nothing about git inner workings. All in all, we'll have to agree to disagree. It would be silly to turn this into a bzr vs git war; and more so because I really don't have anything against bzr; it's just that I have nothing *for* it, either, at the moment. Juanma