Re: BitBucket: GPL-ed KitBeeper clone

Pavel Machek
2003-03-07T10:59:00Z

Hi!

> But anyway, what made[1] Bitkeeper suck less is the real DAG
> structure. Neither arch nor subversion seem to have understood that
> and, as a result, don't and won't provide the same level of semantics.
> Zero hope for Linus to use them, ever. They're needed for any
> decently distributed development process.

Can you elaborate? I thought that this
"real DAG" structure is more or less
equivalent to each developer having
his owm CVS repository...

> Hell, arch is still at the update-before-commit level. I'd have hoped
> PRCS would have cured that particular sickness in SCM design ages ago.
>
> Atomicity, symbolic links, file renames, splits (copy) and merges (the
> different files suddendly ending up being the same one) are somewhat
> important, but not the interesting part. A good distributed DAG
> structure and a quality 3-point version "merge" is what you actually
> need to build bk-level SCMs.

If I fixed CVS renames, added atomic
commits, splits and merges, and gave each
developer his own CVS repository,
would I be in same league as bk?
Ie 10 times slower but equivalent
functionality?

(3 point merge should be doable for CVS
to and would be good thing anyway,
right?)
Pavel
--
Pavel
Written on sharp zaurus, because my Velo1 broke. If you have Velo you don't need...