On Sun, Mar 06, 2011 at 10:55:31PM +0100, Toni Mueller wrote: > On Sun, 06.03.2011 at 16:01:04 -0500, Scott Kitterman <debian@kitterman.com> wrote: > > With bzr the transition from svn is a little easier than that. Almost any svn > > command you would use, the same command works with bzr, e.g. svn co and bzr > > co. > I can confirm that bzr-svn works much more smoothly than git-svn, but > that's about it, in terms of advantages, as far as I'm concerned. AIUI Scott is talking here about the ease of transitioning an svn user to bzr because of the similarity of the command model, not about using either git or bzr to access the current svn repo. > > I find bzr to be very reliable in the projects I use it on (where people are > > using Debian, Ubuntu and some *bsd variants). It also seems it's learning > > curve is less steep than git's. > I can mostly agree to that, but eg. branching is *MUCH* more of a > hassle and, so far, merging also appears to be much more difficult to > me. Do you mean the fact that branches each require a separate directory, rather than being collocated in a single directory the way git's are? I don't know why you would say that merging is more difficult in bzr, frankly. Perhaps you're comparing bzr merging with the seemingly common git practice of discarding revision history as a substitute for doing an actual DVCS merge? Having done merges in both systems, I don't see any major differences. -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. Ubuntu Developer http://www.debian.org/ slangasek@ubuntu.com vorlon@debian.org
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature