Paul Moore wrote: > 2008/11/5 Barry Warsaw <barry at python.org>: >> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >> Hash: SHA1 >> >> On Nov 5, 2008, at 6:09 AM, Paul Moore wrote: >> >>> I'll freely admit a (not very) hidden bias here - the slowness of an >>> initial clone (or going through the "download a shared repo, unpack >>> it, create a branch and update" rigmarole) makes this a nasty test for >>> Bazaar. But I do nevertheless think it's an important use case, as >>> it's all about encouraging casual users to contribute. >> One thing that we're not taking advantage of on code.python.org for Bazaar >> is "stacked branches". This is basically an indirection technique that >> doesn't require a full revision history download to get started. Stacked >> branches greatly improve performance for the initial pull and push, and >> reduces disk usage on the server. > > While that would be good, my understanding is that stacked branches in > Bazaar only work (for history operations) while you're online. So they > make Bazaar work a little like a centralised VCS, I guess. Not sure > how that's a step forward :-) You only need full history in order to ask "how did this code get to this state" type questions. That's something a core dev will occasionally want to know (which is why we would take to the time to setup a full checkout no matter how long it takes), but utterly irrelevant to a casual committer such as the one in your "write and submit a quick patch" scenario. Also, the DVCSs shouldn't be compared just against each other - we need the benchmark numbers against the current SVN repository as well. Cheers, Nick. -- Nick Coghlan | ncoghlan at gmail.com | Brisbane, Australia ---------------------------------------------------------------
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4