Re: Mercurial - Distributed SCM in Gnome (Was: Git vs SVN (was: Can we improve things?))

[Mikael Hallendal <micke imendio com>]

22 sep 2007 kl. 16.05 skrev Sean Kelley:

Hi,

> On 9/16/07, Mikael Hallendal <micke imendio com> wrote:
> > 16 sep 2007 kl. 04.40 skrev Curtis Hovey:
> >
> > > On Sat, 2007-09-15 at 21:44 -0400, Behdad Esfahbod wrote:
> > > > On Sun, 2007-09-16 at 01:10 +0200, Ali Sabil wrote:
> > > >   - Keith Packard did a fairly extensive research of which DSCM
> > > > system
> > > > to use for xorg and other fd.o projects, from a storage  
> > > > robustness /
> > > > performance point of view, and he wrote this excellent piece:
> > > >
> > > >   http://keithp.com/blog/Repository_Formats_Matter.html
> > >
> > > This document is a year old; projects that are under heavy  
> > > development
> > > like Bazaar are misrepresented. For instance bzr has changed it's
> > > repository format, and is much faster that it was a year ago.
> >
> > In fairness, so is Git. It's perceived complexity is to a large part
> > based on people trying it out a long time ago while it is as well
> > being developed and higher level abstractions are added.
>
>
> In my opinion Mercurial has much of the benefits of GIT but with the
> ease of use of SVN.  We dropped GIT and SVN at my company in favor of
> Mercurial.

In what way is Mercurial simpler to use than Git? Looking quickly at  
the Mercurial docs it seemed quite similar to Git in terms of  
complexity.

I've found most distributed scm's to be similarly complex (not  
considering early versions Git and Arch, etc). The complexity of  
distributed scm's are in the areas where CVS/Svn can't even operate.

Cheers,
  Mikael Hallendal

> Sean
>
> > Cheers,
> >    Mikael Hallendal
> >
> > --
> > Imendio AB, http://www.imendio.com
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > desktop-devel-list mailing list
> > desktop-devel-list gnome org
> > http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list



--
Imendio AB, http://www.imendio.com