tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-822738186956251465.post4399274513412713330..comments2023-11-09T00:23:18.101-05:00Comments on Brent's Tech Ramblings: My Distributed Version Control System comparisonBrenthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17023647333704400692noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-822738186956251465.post-21329136296678666762012-03-29T22:43:04.350-04:002012-03-29T22:43:04.350-04:00So apparently when I migrated comments from the ol...So apparently when I migrated comments from the old rails.brentsowers.com to www.brentsowers.com it didn't carry over one of my comments:<br /><br />Originally made September 26, 2010:<br />Thank you for the comments Jakub. Since I haven't really used git on a collaborative project (I've just used it for personal projects), I appreciate someone with more experience with it sharing your thoughts on it.<br /><br />Git on Windows - Based on your comments, I re-evaluated msysGit. It had been about a year since I tried it. I don't know if I was just using it wrong a year ago (maybe I was just using the "Git Bash"), or if there wasn't support to run it natively as a regular executable in Windows back then, but I was pleasantly surprised to be able to do a git clone directly from the Windows command prompt. Same thing goes for the other people in the class I took, this was in March, not sure if the native support was there in Windows or not. But most of the people there with Windows laptops still struggled with getting it to work correctly. <br /><br />GUI - There may be 3rd party GUIs for git that are better than the bazaar explorer GUI. Bazaar explorer isn't particularly great, but it does just about everything you need to do and it looks decent. It comes with Bazaar so you don't have to do your own separate investigation for which GUI to use, as you would have to if you want to use the 3rd party git GUIs.<br /><br />Revision identifiers - I would definitely argue that 9471 or 12963 is easier to remember bb9de5a. This is a matter of opinion though. And having numbers shows an immediate order to the revisions, you know that 9471 was before 12963, at least on the current branch. Pretty much every developer at my company that I've talked with about changing VCSes says the same thing about git - they don't want to have to use hash tags to refer to revisions.<br /><br />Performance - Before version 2.0 of Bazaar (which came out in 2009, not sure when in the year) and the "2a" repository format, Bazaar's performance did suck pretty bad, from what I've read. The two comparisons that you linked to are no longer valid for Bazaar, the 2008 comparison was before version 2.0 came out, and the 2009 comparison specifically says that it uses Bazaar 1.10. For performance statistics, I was going by the benchmarks on Bazaar's site: http://doc.bazaar.canonical.com/migration/en/why-switch-to-bazaar.html<br />Granted, since this on on Bazaar's site, the test conditions I'm sure are more favorable for Bazaar.Brenthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17023647333704400692noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-822738186956251465.post-25155040652000634582010-10-03T13:34:05.294-04:002010-10-03T13:34:05.294-04:00I've made a new post explaining some of the pr...I've made a new post explaining some of the problems we've run in to with Bazaar and how to get around the problems, or how to correctly use Bazaar:<br><a href="http://rails.brentsowers.com/2010/10/bazaar-problems-and-lessons-learned.html" rel="nofollow">Bazaar problems and lessons learned</a>.Brenthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17023647333704400692noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-822738186956251465.post-67154038663459864282010-09-26T13:43:05.797-04:002010-09-26T13:43:05.797-04:00One further comment about Git GUIs distributed wit...One further comment about <b>Git GUIs</b> distributed with Git: You should take into account that it is two programs: <b>gitk</b>, which is graphical history viewer, and <b>git gui</b>, which is commit tool, that are together equivalent of Bazaar Explorer.Jakub Narebskihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11847202568800326989noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-822738186956251465.post-48179371001001988122010-09-26T10:23:49.580-04:002010-09-26T10:23:49.580-04:00Note: I am Git user and developer, and I know Merc...<i>Note: I am Git user and developer, and I know Mercurial and Bazaar only from hearsay.</i><br><br>A few comments<br><br><b>Git on Windows</b>. The <a href="http://code.google.com/p/msysgit/" rel="nofollow">msysGit</a> project (or rather its "Git for Windows" download) is <i>native</i> Windows implementation of Git. It doesn't use and does not require Cygwin. But I agree that if you need version control system that works well on Windows, Git might not be a best choice.<br><br><b>GUI</b>. <b>gitk</b> and <b>git gui</b> use Tcl/Tk to be portable: you can use them on Linux, on MS Windows, on MacOS X. The <a href="https://git.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/InterfacesFrontendsAndTools#Graphical_Interfaces" rel="nofollow">Interfaces, frontends, and tools</a> page on Git Wiki provides list of various Git GUIs, including some cross-platform ones. I don't know if any of them is as good as you imply Bazaar Explorer GUI is.<br><br><b>Revision identifiers</b>. First, to have <b>version <i>numbers</i></b> you need either central authority / central repository (this is what Bazaar does, with its rewriting of version numbers by central repository, and slightly different operations for merging / updating in central repository and in leaf repositories), or have version numbers local to single repository (that is what Mercurial does, and which means that your version 5643 is not mine version 5643).<br><br>Second, you don't need to use version identifiers much. You usually use expressions that count version from tip or from some tag (e.g. v1.6.5~10, i.e. 10 commits before v1.6.5).<br><br>Also the ease of version numbers is overrated, especially with heavily nonlinear (branchy) history. Is revision number 9471 or 12963 that much easier to use than revision identifier bb9de5a? With nonlinear history you can't say whether revision 7634 is before 7643, or are they on separate branches (the dotted notation in Bazaar could help there, but it has its own disadvantages).<br><br><b>Performance</b>. You complain (a bit) about Mercurial performance and its repository size... while both Git and Mercurial are much, much better on both accounts than Bazaar: see e.g. <a href="http://vcscompare.blogspot.com/2008/06/git-mercurial-bazaar-repository-size.html" rel="nofollow">DVCS Comparison: Git, Mercurial, Bazaar Repository Size Benchmark</a> (from 2008), or <a href="http://ldn.linuxfoundation.org/article/dvcs-round-one-system-rule-them-all-part-3" rel="nofollow">DVCS Round-up: One System to Rule Them All? -- Part 3</a> (from 2009), or its follow-up.Jakub Narebskihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11847202568800326989noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-822738186956251465.post-46702375807574342192010-09-26T10:22:23.401-04:002010-09-26T10:22:23.401-04:00This comment has been removed by the author.This comment has been removed by the author.Jakub Narebskihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11847202568800326989noreply@blogger.com