| 1 |
Ned Ludd wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> On Thu, 2007-01-25 at 23:37 +0100, Markus Ullmann wrote: |
| 4 |
>> So to avoid thread hijacking, starting a new one. |
| 5 |
> |
| 6 |
> What exactly is this thread you are starting about? Just letting us know |
| 7 |
> you did some random testing? |
| 8 |
> |
| 9 |
I think this is a reference to news:200701112229.58538.peper@g.o |
| 10 |
where I was asking about what would be a good distributed scm. Thanks for |
| 11 |
testing jokey. |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
There was a massive thread on the git/bzr lists which marienz pointed out, |
| 14 |
which has TBH given me a massive headache ;) The gist of what I read was |
| 15 |
that both use UUIDs, but bzr leans towards local rev ids for styles of |
| 16 |
development where full distribution is not required (ie star topographies.) |
| 17 |
Additionally, bzr makes a new rev every time there is a merge, even if |
| 18 |
nothing has changed. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
I like the bzr approach of providing a framework, but I guess I'm still |
| 21 |
leaning towards git, as I'm not really after a framework per se. So it's |
| 22 |
good to know you can set up a repo which will commit to a svn parent. |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
-- |
| 26 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives