From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jakub Narebski Subject: Re: Google Code: Support for Mercurial and Analysis of Git and Mercurial Date: Sun, 26 Apr 2009 01:16:16 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: References: <200904260703.31243.chriscool@tuxfamily.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: git@vger.kernel.org To: Christian Couder X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Mon Apr 27 05:42:55 2009 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 1LxzYm-00086M-1K for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Sun, 26 Apr 2009 10:18:00 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752854AbZDZIQW (ORCPT ); Sun, 26 Apr 2009 04:16:22 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752517AbZDZIQV (ORCPT ); Sun, 26 Apr 2009 04:16:21 -0400 Received: from mail-fx0-f158.google.com ([209.85.220.158]:47238 "EHLO mail-fx0-f158.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752484AbZDZIQT (ORCPT ); Sun, 26 Apr 2009 04:16:19 -0400 Received: by fxm2 with SMTP id 2so1766083fxm.37 for ; Sun, 26 Apr 2009 01:16:17 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:received:received :x-authentication-warning:to:cc:subject:references:from:date :in-reply-to:message-id:lines:user-agent:mime-version:content-type; bh=DF/iJYvK0J9b31MUlSfKSDA2sFa346WO27kaj1qUOH0=; b=HdXq4S52rTFrKK8lHrIzXNMIEzDdkcjSKUQEFh1LQZJ28ng5b+y0Nuz9VpdwwC/k9g LPto/CdCy0SoCDggO5O4L0UptzJs7SAX9E8cRaD8EtXsv9LerWr5otfq2OJNiA+iTgQj B593drq2EBMLtOJI9vBaKNl5w/1JG24TPTxsw= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=x-authentication-warning:to:cc:subject:references:from:date :in-reply-to:message-id:lines:user-agent:mime-version:content-type; b=goaOpLRNTqukXRD5HU6hDqd/+Fpl4Qax25GxAluMc2U+tW5g2Eou1kGOmFRkqRmRLN dvGJ/rN63QNajACCzSmaiknSvReeL/36NbHyuA33Qyxo+tolEPb03pgz2xtlOoxqs8/s cJNRJT49NhQV6j+P6qqiq/qUoNHPWgkuQR8iY= Received: by 10.103.173.5 with SMTP id a5mr2414173mup.57.1240733777262; Sun, 26 Apr 2009 01:16:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain (abwp56.neoplus.adsl.tpnet.pl [83.8.239.56]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id 12sm8752333muq.21.2009.04.26.01.16.15 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Sun, 26 Apr 2009 01:16:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.localdomain (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id n3Q8JEmO025108; Sun, 26 Apr 2009 10:19:24 +0200 Received: (from jnareb@localhost) by localhost.localdomain (8.13.4/8.13.4/Submit) id n3Q8Iw7T025101; Sun, 26 Apr 2009 10:18:58 +0200 X-Authentication-Warning: localhost.localdomain: jnareb set sender to jnareb@gmail.com using -f In-Reply-To: <200904260703.31243.chriscool@tuxfamily.org> User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.4 Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Christian Couder writes: > For information, now Google Code supports Mercurial for project hosting: > > http://google-code-updates.blogspot.com/2009/04/mercurial-support-for-project-hosting.html > > Mercurial was choosen over Git because of this (one year old) analysis: > > http://code.google.com/p/support/wiki/DVCSAnalysis > > There is this article on LWN about the analysis: > > http://lwn.net/Articles/330138/ It is a pity that the choice was based on year old analysis. One year for actively developed and fast moving targets such like Git and Mercurial is ages in terms of development history. But I guess this is unavoidable. For example periodic "maintenance" (garbage collecting) is nowadays quite automatic in git, with fetching into pack, periodic repacking if number of loose objects is above tthreshold, and "git gc --auto". Whether Mercurial or Git has better UI and better documentation is IMHO a matter of debate. Git documentation is much better that it was, with "Git User's Manual" and "Git Community Book"; UI also is being improved. I can't comment on MS Windows support, but AFAIK Mercurial has better support here than Git. The deciding feature (well, one of deciding features) was the fact that Mercurial has better HTTP support... I guess (it was not obvious from the analysis, but it was hinted at) that Mercurial uses its custom protocol over HTTP, as opposed to "dumb" HTTP protocol support in Git. Perhaps it is time to restart work on _"smart" HTTP protocol_? -- Jakub Narebski Poland ShadeHawk on #git