From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Bastien Subject: Re: Re: Git repository Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2008 18:34:23 +0100 Message-ID: <87d4rhlx0g.fsf@bzg.ath.cx> References: <87y7a62eng.fsf@gollum.intra.norang.ca> <4A1A58D4-4BE6-468C-B7EC-1324D354DD0D@science.uva.nl> <20080131160113.GC16742@odin.demosthenes.org> <20080131163300.GC21213@atlantic.linksys.moosehall> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1JKdJ8-0001A3-7x for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 31 Jan 2008 12:34:38 -0500 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1JKdJ5-00018L-Oo for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 31 Jan 2008 12:34:37 -0500 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JKdJ5-00017l-8J for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 31 Jan 2008 12:34:35 -0500 Received: from fg-out-1718.google.com ([72.14.220.159]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1JKdJ4-0006Pz-LW for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 31 Jan 2008 12:34:34 -0500 Received: by fg-out-1718.google.com with SMTP id d23so755134fga.30 for ; Thu, 31 Jan 2008 09:34:30 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <20080131163300.GC21213@atlantic.linksys.moosehall> (Adam Spiers's message of "Thu, 31 Jan 2008 16:33:00 +0000") List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org To: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org Adam Spiers writes: > On Thu, Jan 31, 2008 at 10:01:13AM -0600, Russell Adams wrote: >> I'm a bazaar fan myself. I'd be curious if someone can point out where >> git is superior. ;] > > I can't remember the details, but I'm pretty sure that I saw reference > to issues with the design of the underlying backend. The most obvious > symptom of this would be the performance difference - git is > well-known to cream pretty much everything except mercurial (which > IIRC has a very similar design, minus the object packing). > > But I'm sure some quick googling would tell you a lot more than my > hazy memories do :-) FYI Eric S. Raymond is working on a paper where all dVCS systems will be compared. The Emacs dev team is waiting for his conclusions in order to decide what system should be used instead of the actual CVS. But there is more to consider than technical benchmarks since RMS also insist on preferring a tool that is part of the GNU project. Of course this doesn't affect the choice of a tool for Org, and git sounds like a good one to me. -- Bastien