lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2003]   [Mar]   [7]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [more markup]  [less markup]  [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
DateThu, 6 Mar 2003 17:18:53 +0100
FromPavel Machek <>
SubjectRe: BitBucket: GPL-ed KitBeeper clone
Hi!

> But anyway, what made[1] Bitkeeper suck less is the real DAG
> structure.  Neither arch nor subversion seem to have understood that
> and, as a result, don't and won't provide the same level of semantics.
> Zero hope for Linus to use them, ever.  They're needed for any
> decently distributed development process.

Can you elaborate? I thought that this
"real DAG" structure is more or less
equivalent to each developer having
his owm CVS repository...

> Hell, arch is still at the update-before-commit level.  I'd have hoped
> PRCS would have cured that particular sickness in SCM design ages ago.
> 
> Atomicity, symbolic links, file renames, splits (copy) and merges (the
> different files suddendly ending up being the same one) are somewhat
> important, but not the interesting part.  A good distributed DAG
> structure and a quality 3-point version "merge" is what you actually
> need to build bk-level SCMs.

If I fixed CVS renames, added atomic
commits, splits and merges, and gave each
developer his own CVS repository,
would I be in same league as bk?
Ie 10 times slower but equivalent
functionality?

(3 point merge should be doable for CVS
to and would be good thing anyway,
right?)
				Pavel
-- 
				Pavel
Written on sharp zaurus, because my Velo1 broke. If you have Velo you don't need...

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:33    [from the cache]
©2003-2008