From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Arne Babenhauserheide Subject: Re: [VOTE] git versus mercurial (for DragonflyBSD) Date: Mon, 27 Oct 2008 08:16:02 +0100 Message-ID: <200810270816.06020.arne_bab@web.de> References: <200810270120.55276.arne_bab@web.de> Reply-To: "Arne Babenhauserheide" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="nextPart1534925.M6ENV1EyOh"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: mercurial@selenic.com, "Jakub Narebski" , git@vger.kernel.org To: SLONIK.AZ@gmail.com X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Mon Oct 27 08:17:31 2008 connect(): Connection refused Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1KuMLv-0005vW-7b for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Mon, 27 Oct 2008 08:17:27 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751756AbYJ0HQL (ORCPT ); Mon, 27 Oct 2008 03:16:11 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751785AbYJ0HQL (ORCPT ); Mon, 27 Oct 2008 03:16:11 -0400 Received: from fmmailgate03.web.de ([217.72.192.234]:42987 "EHLO fmmailgate03.web.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751649AbYJ0HQK (ORCPT ); Mon, 27 Oct 2008 03:16:10 -0400 Received: from smtp08.web.de (fmsmtp08.dlan.cinetic.de [172.20.5.216]) by fmmailgate03.web.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5CFADF30D375; Mon, 27 Oct 2008 08:16:09 +0100 (CET) Received: from [217.227.70.45] (helo=fluss.localnet) by smtp08.web.de with asmtp (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (WEB.DE 4.109 #226) id 1KuMKe-00050W-00; Mon, 27 Oct 2008 08:16:09 +0100 User-Agent: KMail/1.10.1 (Linux/2.6.25-gentoo-r7; KDE/4.1.1; x86_64; ; ) In-Reply-To: X-Sender: arne_bab@web.de X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX1+tEVA3dgWlyg7IljFPIxNcIpBFZ+kNiodgAmP9 akiH0zOTB1HpS8wiZ2+D9uI6qR2wlg4DgBP46mYWIZzcPkWrSr t1Ad5eEJ0= Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: --nextPart1534925.M6ENV1EyOh Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline Am Montag 27 Oktober 2008 05:15:11 schrieb Leo Razoumov: > > I created a head-to-head code_swarm of Mercurial and Git and it clearly > > shows that Mercurial development didn't slow down. > > I am not familiar with code swarms, sorry. My impressions are > subjective are thoroughly un-scientific:-) That's always the case with code_swarms.=20 They only show the commit activity: How often how many files where changed.= =20 They aren't a fair comparision but a damn unfair battle relying strongly on= =20 development style, programming language (influences the style) and such.=20 What you can see very clearly in them is how activity patterns _change_.=20 And the Mercurial activity doesn't slow down.=20 Instead in the beginning you can see them pacing each other, git always the= =20 bigger activity.=20 There was a moment in may this year when git activity had receded to the po= int=20 where it was equal to Mercurials activity, but it recovered from that.=20 An artifact in Mercurial is that it took an almost two week break in July t= his=20 year, but apart from that development always rolled on, and in august the=20 commits where coming fast again.=20 The smaller activity can for example be a result of a development style whe= re=20 changes are thouroughly discussed before they get implemented.=20 > (1) Judging by the activity of mailing lists git community is several > times larger and more active in terms of actual submitted patches. This is something which didn't change. Git had higher activity from the sta= rt,=20 yet Mercurials actual code paced it well and was faster at some things.=20 Git still has higher activity, but that can simply stem from Mercurial bein= g=20 almost completely done in Python which need less code to do the same work.= =20 > (2) Hg forest extension is still not in the tree with outdated and > incorrect documentation in the wiki. For me it was biggest reason to > migrate from Hg to git. Why didn't you instead update the documentation in the wiki?=20 I don't use the forest extension, so I can't judge whether it is fit for=20 inclusion in the tree.=20 But I wrote the group extension and learned that way that writing Mercurial= =20 extensions is far easier than I thought. And different from the shell, Pyth= on=20 code is platform independent.=20 Best wishes,=20 Arne =2D- My stuff: http://draketo.de - stories, songs, poems, programs and stuf= f :) =2D- Infinite Hands: http://infinite-hands.draketo.de - singing a part of t= he=20 history of free software. =2D- Ein W=FCrfel System: http://1w6.org - einfach saubere (Rollenspiel-) R= egeln. =2D- PGP/GnuPG: http://draketo.de/inhalt/ich/pubkey.txt --nextPart1534925.M6ENV1EyOh Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (GNU/Linux) iEYEABECAAYFAkkFarUACgkQMwdGm/6WxARHhgCfVHz3clwzj4yYddfgf5H9qzot BmMAmwTtojabHxwnjqh8dItikowTyEtA =Ri0f -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --nextPart1534925.M6ENV1EyOh--