Re: VCS comparison table

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

 



On 10/21/06, Sean <seanlkml@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Sat, 21 Oct 2006 18:19:54 +0200
"Erik Bågfors" <zindar@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> This is just plain wrong.
>
> bzr is a fully decentralized VCS. I've read this thread for quite some
> time now and I really cannot understand why people come to this
> conclusion.
>
> However, if you do want to work centralized, bzr has commands that
> fits that workflow really good.

Have you been reading this thread at all?

Yes.

Even the bzr people have now
stated rather firmly that the revno scheme doesn't work very well in
a number of situations.  Numerous examples have been given where the
revno will be useless, or worse misleading when bzr is used without
a central server.  The answer from the bzr folks has been then don't
use the revno in those situations.  However, it's quite clear from the
bzr UI that there is a _bias_ towards using revno's.

So yes, clearly you can use bzr without a central server; but it's just
as clearly biased against such usage.

So... I do agree that revnos might not fit perfectly in at all times.
But that they automatically mean that bzr is not a decentralized VCS,
I strongly disagree with.  They are just one part of the equation.

/Erik
--
google talk/jabber. zindar@xxxxxxxxx
SIP-phones: sip:erik_bagfors@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
sip:17476714687@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Gcc Help]     [IETF Annouce]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Networking]     [Security]     [V4L]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Fedora Users]