From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "John Wiegley" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: On the subject of Git, Bazaar, and the future of Emacs development Date: Wed, 27 Mar 2013 14:10:35 +0000 Organization: New Artisans LLC Message-ID: References: <87ehf1cwc4.fsf@maru.md5i.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1364393456 1568 80.91.229.3 (27 Mar 2013 14:10:56 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 27 Mar 2013 14:10:56 +0000 (UTC) To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Mar 27 15:11:23 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 1UKr4T-0000hY-TC for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 27 Mar 2013 15:11:22 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:58103 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UKr45-0007G9-QS for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 27 Mar 2013 10:10:57 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:53371) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UKr3v-0007Fk-Eb for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 27 Mar 2013 10:10:51 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UKr3q-0002Tj-7C for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 27 Mar 2013 10:10:47 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-ve0-f180.google.com ([209.85.128.180]:64428) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UKr3q-0002Td-3Y for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 27 Mar 2013 10:10:42 -0400 Original-Received: by mail-ve0-f180.google.com with SMTP id c13so4785036vea.25 for ; Wed, 27 Mar 2013 07:10:41 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=x-received:sender:from:to:subject:organization:references :mail-followup-to:date:in-reply-to:message-id:user-agent :mime-version:content-type; bh=WfIUgr2bOVXSfLH10krgOZfzXfoBEudV3sNfixEa6R0=; b=wReVWLY9ZHnznEm4U56MxxwJFSwrVms1Y6kyBWs8oScZlb+7AvCJIYjVn2aDXugGDj EX/G7pOaTJDYEwRXQm4ruch1EF8Bwm03/Rl8BWVspA7HZgI+8UxMX5LrYD0CNRGnCKQs XCz+0fU3RCVByYkqmkg5ayAbGxAz6nIHOWQ80J+EcP+Iyd13FhQY3hmZ32fwWdgtbQEp Fhvi/AcopJmMv2RN+HdOS48tHPbi8366dtD1mtasv2WumC/DgqowyUvrjqvBpp0E9OK9 Uig7e1ADG11GVxqp0a93fj0o3sOyq5kvcd11pR2/z8wjO7k2uus3geYPKVOxf+D5oOYC 6Kgg== X-Received: by 10.58.11.133 with SMTP id q5mr3432364veb.47.1364393441690; Wed, 27 Mar 2013 07:10:41 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: from Hermes.local (cpc11-mort5-2-0-cust73.19-2.cable.virginmedia.com. [80.235.133.74]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id b7sm29653046veq.7.2013.03.27.07.10.39 (version=TLSv1 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Wed, 27 Mar 2013 07:10:40 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: by Hermes.local (Postfix, from userid 501) id 6E0CD93FC8A; Wed, 27 Mar 2013 14:10:36 +0000 (GMT) Mail-Followup-To: emacs-devel@gnu.org In-Reply-To: <87ehf1cwc4.fsf@maru.md5i.com> (Michael Welsh Duggan's message of "Wed, 27 Mar 2013 00:15:07 -0400") User-Agent: Gnus/5.130006 (Ma Gnus v0.6) Emacs/24.3 (darwin) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 3.x [fuzzy] X-Received-From: 209.85.128.180 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:158306 Archived-At: >>>>> Michael Welsh Duggan writes: > 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. I love to debate technical merits as much as the next guy, but that really wasn't the motive for my opening post. What we have to consider are issues affecting Emacs development as a whole -- not how well structured one DVCS' DAG is over another, or whether one license is stronger than another. Here is a brief list of things I believe we want in a VCS for Emacs: - A stable VCS, with an active community, where bugs get fixed in a timely fashion. - Something fast, efficient, and with good performance "over the wire". - A system people stand more chance of already knowing, so there is little inertia to prevent them from becoming active Emacs contributors. There are some of us (present company included) who use Bazaar for nothing else outside of Emacs, but who do use Git on a daily basis for many other projects. It would be nice, at least from a personal standpoint, if I could leverage that experience. - As much of a consistent ecosystem among various areas of Emacs development as possible. - A system with a good integration story in Emacs itself (magit!), since this is the environment many of us will be working in. - A system with lots and lots of external resources we can point people to, with an active and helpful community, so that we ourselves are never bogged down answering question about said system. I think Git presents us with a pretty good answer to each of these points, in terms of Emacs development. Bazaar has an answer to some of them as well, but I think no other system is as resoundingly in our favor as Git on almost every point. John