[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Switching to git



Hi Steve,

On Sun, 06.03.2011 at 14:18:40 -0800, Steve Langasek <vorlon@debian.org> wrote:
> 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 was talking about the robustness of using an SVN repository. With
bzr, it just works, and with git... it works, too (maybe).

At least, I get a reproducible problem downloading roundup's SVN repo
with git, where it breaks somewhere in the middle. Oh, and hg also
threw up badly, afair. This is what I sent to the roundup-dev at the
end of 2009, when "they" had a similar discussion:

--------------------
rsync'ing the SVN repo: very good
bzr-svn: very good
git-svn: ok (crashes every 1000 revisions)
using svn directly against the SF repo: bad (dog slow)
hg-convert: very bad (didn't complete yet from the SF repo, several
            connection resets from SF)

--------------------

"very good" means that it worked in one go, and with acceptable
performance.


> 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?

This is one thing, yes. Also, the bzr way, I can easily lose the
corellation between any two branches because they just don't know
about each other. For me, the ability to switch branches in-place is
also a big win, at least with our current setup (which is hard to
change).

> 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.

I've _often_ run into the situation that merging was just impossible
("... branches have diverged..." and similar messages, where I was just
stuck and had to manually transplant the changes from one branch to the
other, thus _definitely_ losing all history of the other branch.

Maybe it's only me, but although I find git difficult to learn at the
beginning, it didn't yet give me such blockers "down the road".


-- 
Kind regards,
--Toni++


Reply to: