From: Arne Babenhauserheide <arne_bab@web.de>
To: SLONIK.AZ@gmail.com
Cc: mercurial@selenic.com, "Jakub Narebski" <jnareb@gmail.com>,
git@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [VOTE] git versus mercurial (for DragonflyBSD)
Date: Mon, 27 Oct 2008 08:16:02 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200810270816.06020.arne_bab@web.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ee2a733e0810262115h705356dfmbc2237f8e88f3985@mail.gmail.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2642 bytes --]
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.
They only show the commit activity: How often how many files where changed.
They aren't a fair comparision but a damn unfair battle relying strongly on
development style, programming language (influences the style) and such.
What you can see very clearly in them is how activity patterns _change_.
And the Mercurial activity doesn't slow down.
Instead in the beginning you can see them pacing each other, git always the
bigger activity.
There was a moment in may this year when git activity had receded to the point
where it was equal to Mercurials activity, but it recovered from that.
An artifact in Mercurial is that it took an almost two week break in July this
year, but apart from that development always rolled on, and in august the
commits where coming fast again.
The smaller activity can for example be a result of a development style where
changes are thouroughly discussed before they get implemented.
> (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 start,
yet Mercurials actual code paced it well and was faster at some things.
Git still has higher activity, but that can simply stem from Mercurial being
almost completely done in Python which need less code to do the same work.
> (2) Hg forest extension is still not in the tree with outdated and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?
I don't use the forest extension, so I can't judge whether it is fit for
inclusion in the tree.
But I wrote the group extension and learned that way that writing Mercurial
extensions is far easier than I thought. And different from the shell, Python
code is platform independent.
Best wishes,
Arne
-- My stuff: http://draketo.de - stories, songs, poems, programs and stuff :)
-- Infinite Hands: http://infinite-hands.draketo.de - singing a part of the
history of free software.
-- Ein Würfel System: http://1w6.org - einfach saubere (Rollenspiel-) Regeln.
-- PGP/GnuPG: http://draketo.de/inhalt/ich/pubkey.txt
[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 197 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-10-27 7:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 65+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-10-26 4:28 [VOTE] git versus mercurial walt
2008-10-26 14:15 ` [VOTE] git versus mercurial (for DragonflyBSD) Jakub Narebski
2008-10-26 14:30 ` Maxim Vuets
2008-10-26 15:05 ` Leo Razoumov
2008-10-26 18:55 ` Jakub Narebski
2008-10-27 0:20 ` Arne Babenhauserheide
2008-10-27 4:15 ` Leo Razoumov
2008-10-27 7:16 ` Arne Babenhauserheide [this message]
2008-10-27 7:16 ` dhruva
2008-10-27 0:47 ` Arne Babenhauserheide
2008-10-27 1:52 ` Jakub Narebski
2008-10-27 7:50 ` Arne Babenhauserheide
2008-10-27 9:41 ` Jakub Narebski
2008-10-27 10:12 ` Leslie P. Polzer
2008-10-27 10:14 ` Arne Babenhauserheide
2008-10-27 12:48 ` Jakub Narebski
[not found] ` <200810271512.26352.arne_bab@web.de>
2008-10-27 18:01 ` Jakub Narebski
2008-10-27 20:48 ` Arne Babenhauserheide
2008-10-27 21:07 ` Miklos Vajna
2008-10-27 21:30 ` Arne Babenhauserheide
2008-10-28 0:13 ` Miklos Vajna
2008-10-28 17:48 ` Andreas Ericsson
2008-10-28 19:11 ` Arne Babenhauserheide
2008-10-28 19:38 ` SZEDER Gábor
2008-11-06 16:25 ` Marcin Kasperski
2008-11-06 17:41 ` Isaac Jurado
2008-10-28 19:16 ` Randal L. Schwartz
2008-10-27 23:25 ` Jakub Narebski
2008-10-27 9:29 ` Benoit Boissinot
2008-10-27 10:57 ` Jakub Narebski
2008-10-27 14:29 ` 0000 vk
2008-10-27 14:57 ` Jakub Narebski
[not found] ` <1225100597.31813.11.camel@abelardo.lan>
2008-10-27 11:42 ` David Soria Parra
2008-10-27 20:07 ` Brandon Casey
2008-10-27 20:37 ` Jakub Narebski
2008-10-28 1:28 ` Nicolas Pitre
2008-10-26 15:57 ` Felipe Contreras
2008-10-26 19:07 ` Jakub Narebski
2008-10-26 19:54 ` Felipe Contreras
2008-10-28 12:31 ` [VOTE] git versus mercurial walt
2008-10-28 14:28 ` Johannes Schindelin
2008-10-28 14:41 ` Git/Mercurial interoperability (and what about bzr?) (was: Re: [VOTE] git versus mercurial) Peter Krefting
2008-10-28 14:59 ` Johannes Schindelin
2008-10-28 15:02 ` Git/Mercurial interoperability (and what about bzr?) Matthieu Moy
2008-10-28 15:03 ` Git/Mercurial interoperability (and what about bzr?) (was: Re: [VOTE] git versus mercurial) Nicolas Pitre
2008-10-28 15:33 ` Pieter de Bie
2008-10-28 19:12 ` Miklos Vajna
2008-10-28 21:10 ` Miklos Vajna
2008-10-28 21:31 ` Theodore Tso
2008-10-28 23:28 ` Miklos Vajna
2008-11-01 8:06 ` Git/Mercurial interoperability (and what about bzr?) Florian Weimer
2008-11-01 10:03 ` Santi Béjar
2008-11-01 10:33 ` Jakub Narebski
2008-11-01 10:44 ` Florian Weimer
2008-11-01 11:10 ` Florian Weimer
2008-11-01 12:26 ` Jakub Narebski
2008-11-01 13:39 ` Theodore Tso
2008-11-01 17:51 ` Linus Torvalds
2008-11-02 1:13 ` Theodore Tso
2008-11-01 10:16 ` Git/Mercurial interoperability (and what about bzr?) (was: Re: [VOTE] git versus mercurial) Peter Krefting
2008-10-29 19:11 ` [VOTE] git versus mercurial Shawn O. Pearce
2008-10-29 19:36 ` Boyd Lynn Gerber
2008-10-29 19:48 ` Johannes Schindelin
2008-10-29 19:51 ` Boyd Lynn Gerber
2008-10-29 8:15 ` Miles Bader
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=200810270816.06020.arne_bab@web.de \
--to=arne_bab@web.de \
--cc=SLONIK.AZ@gmail.com \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=jnareb@gmail.com \
--cc=mercurial@selenic.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).