From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Carl Worth Subject: Re: VCS comparison table Date: Sat, 21 Oct 2006 16:49:04 -0700 Message-ID: <8764ed1b7z.wl%cworth@cworth.org> References: <45357CC3.4040507@utoronto.ca> <20061021191949.GA8096@coredump.intra.peff.net> <20061021214629.GO75501@over-yonder.net> <200610220025.32108.jnareb@gmail.com> <1161474168.9241.188.camel@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI 1.14.6 - "Maruoka") Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="pgp-sign-Multipart_Sat_Oct_21_16:48:59_2006-1"; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Jakub Narebski , bazaar-ng@lists.canonical.com, git@vger.kernel.org X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Sun Oct 22 01:49:15 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 1GbQaY-0003Xh-LK for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Sun, 22 Oct 2006 01:49:15 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1750722AbWJUXtJ (ORCPT ); Sat, 21 Oct 2006 19:49:09 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751711AbWJUXtJ (ORCPT ); Sat, 21 Oct 2006 19:49:09 -0400 Received: from cworth.org ([217.160.249.188]:14805 "EHLO theworths.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750722AbWJUXtH (ORCPT ); Sat, 21 Oct 2006 19:49:07 -0400 Received: (qmail 17157 invoked from network); 21 Oct 2006 19:49:06 -0400 Received: from localhost (HELO raht.cworth.org) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 21 Oct 2006 19:49:06 -0400 To: Jeff Licquia In-Reply-To: <1161474168.9241.188.camel@localhost.localdomain> User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.14.0 (Africa) Emacs/21.4 Mule/5.0 (SAKAKI) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: --pgp-sign-Multipart_Sat_Oct_21_16:48:59_2006-1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII On Sat, 21 Oct 2006 19:42:47 -0400, Jeff Licquia wrote: > I don't think so. Recently, I've been trying to track a particular > patch in the kernel. It was done as a series of commits, and probably > would have been its own branch in bzr, but when I was trying to group > the commits together to analyze them as a group, the easiest way to do > that was by the original committer's name. As far as "its own branch in bzr" would such a branch remain available indefinitely even after being merged in to the main tree? > Now, there's probably a better way to hunt that stuff down, but in this > case hunting the user down worked for me. (It may have made a > difference that I was using gitweb instead of a local clone.) Vast, huge, gaping, cosmic difference. Almost none of the power of git is exposed by gitweb. It's really not worth comparing. (Now a gitweb-alike that provided all the kinds of very easy browsing and filtering of the history like gitk and git might be nice to have.) -Carl --pgp-sign-Multipart_Sat_Oct_21_16:48:59_2006-1 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQBFOrHw6JDdNq8qSWgRApxOAKCgh+XZTnCH4lMHdfjd3FNG7DlZ2gCfVv+m LdAbNr+byIt3bdoWEY4vVac= =obuk -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --pgp-sign-Multipart_Sat_Oct_21_16:48:59_2006-1--