From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andreas Ericsson Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCE] Git wiki Date: Wed, 03 May 2006 17:01:43 +0200 Message-ID: <4458C5D7.8010501@op5.se> References: <20060502232553.GL27689@pasky.or.cz> <7virooj92i.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> <4d8e3fd30605030139k33c5a404k54861fdd02c87134@mail.gmail.com> <20060503090007.GM27689@pasky.or.cz> <4d8e3fd30605030213r625ce87fw5cbee554f1c20fbd@mail.gmail.com> <20060503142957.GA9056@spearce.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Nicolas Pitre , Paolo Ciarrocchi , Petr Baudis , Junio C Hamano , git@vger.kernel.org X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Wed May 03 17:03:22 2006 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FbIrM-00011W-Iq for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Wed, 03 May 2006 17:01:49 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S965213AbWECPBq (ORCPT ); Wed, 3 May 2006 11:01:46 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S965214AbWECPBq (ORCPT ); Wed, 3 May 2006 11:01:46 -0400 Received: from linux-server1.op5.se ([193.201.96.2]:18412 "EHLO smtp-gw1.op5.se") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S965213AbWECPBp (ORCPT ); Wed, 3 May 2006 11:01:45 -0400 Received: from [192.168.1.20] (host-213.88.215.14.addr.se.sn.net [213.88.215.14]) by smtp-gw1.op5.se (Postfix) with ESMTP id C44CD6BCF4; Wed, 3 May 2006 17:01:43 +0200 (CEST) User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.7-1.1.fc4 (X11/20050929) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en To: Shawn Pearce In-Reply-To: <20060503142957.GA9056@spearce.org> Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Shawn Pearce wrote: > Nicolas Pitre wrote: > >>On Wed, 3 May 2006, Paolo Ciarrocchi wrote: >> >>>On 5/3/06, Petr Baudis wrote: >>> >>>>Dear diary, on Wed, May 03, 2006 at 10:39:07AM CEST, I got a letter >>>>where Paolo Ciarrocchi said that... >>>> >>>>>On 5/3/06, Junio C Hamano wrote: >>>>> >>>>>BTW, do you know why GIT has not been selected as SCM for OpenSolaris? >>>>>(they choose Mercurial). >>>> >>>>I think it's explained somewhere in their forums (or mailing lists or >>>>whatever they actually _are_). >>> >>>I only found the announcement, not the rationales. >> >>http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/tools-discuss/2006-April/000366.html >> >>Looks like they didn't buy the argument about the uselessness of >>recording file renames. > > > The final evaluations are available from here (at the very bottom > of the page): > > http://opensolaris.org/os/community/tools/scm/ > > It looks like Mercurial doesn't support renames either, but a lot > of users are asking for it to be supported. So I don't think that's > the reason. It looks more like they didn't enjoy porting GIT 1.2.2 > (as 1.2.4 was found to not work in all cases) to Solaris and the > tester ran into some problems with the conflict resolution support. > > My own reading of the two final evaluations for GIT and Mercurial > leaves me feeling like GIT is a more mature tool which is faster > and more stable then Mercurial. GIT seemed to be more reliable > during testing then Mercurial was, despite the cloning issue. > Which makes me surprised that OpenSolaris selected Mercurial instead. > Considering Sun's CEO's common comments on Solaris' superiority over Linux I think it's safe to assume that the same CEO wouldn't exactly jump of joy if his employees started depending on a tool fathered by Linus. No offence intended to Mercurial or its developers. Although I don't know anything about how it works I'm fairly sure Sun's developers would never agree to be forced to use an inferior tool (congrats Mercurial devs). However, I *do* think that in a tie-break Mercurial would win for political reasons. -- Andreas Ericsson andreas.ericsson@op5.se OP5 AB www.op5.se Tel: +46 8-230225 Fax: +46 8-230231