Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Future of GNU Arch, bazaar and bazaar-ng ... ?

[Andrew Suffield]

On Sun, Aug 21, 2005 at 10:43:47PM +1200, Martin Langhoff wrote:
> On 8/21/05, Matthieu Moy <address@hidden> wrote:
> > What's the future of tla 1.x? Same for 2.0. Given that the main
> > contributors of GNU Arch--except Tom--are mostly people working now on
> > Bazaar-NG, I _guess_ Bazaar is the way of the future.
> 
> I apologize if this is a bit tactless and offtopic. After using Arch
> for a long time, and playing with other SCMs ocassionally, I am
> preparing to transition all my projects to GIT. I have been polishing
> the cvs import that git includes, and I have an extremely draft Arch
> importer I've been working on this weekend on a ferry trip across the
> Cook Strait. I will be polishing it through the week.

git is also my 'next best' choice, in the event that (as appears to be
happening) arch 1 gets abandoned and arch 2 doesn't get anywhere. It's
incomplete and lacking various things arch can do, but this appears
fixable and I'll fix it myself if I have to. Unlike most everything
else, where it doesn't appear fixable.

> YMMV. Arch and other patch-centric SCMs are forever-diverging: there
> is nil support for identifying when two branches are identical. If a
> small group of developers work on their own branches, and exchange
> patches, most if the time you have the same tree, just different
> "record" of patches. GIT knows that instantaneously, and marks it as
> an un-branching: convergence. The trick of constantly hashing files
> and trees pays of handsomely.

Unfortunately there do not presently exist any hashing algorithms
which permit this to be particularly secure. I believe this can be
fixed in a higher layer, but it's a blasted nuisance.

-- 
  .''`.  ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
 : :' :  http://www.debian.org/ |
 `. `'                          |
   `-             -><-          |

signature.asc
Description: Digital signature