Subject: Info Q article on DVCS - a request and some feedback
Date: Friday 9th May 2008 10:26:06 UTC (over 10 years ago)
Hi Sebastien, Well done on your InfoQ article re DVCS tools. It looks quite well researched and well written. If you're interested, I'd like to provide some more information on Bazaar. Perhaps it's worth updating the article to reflect this? First though, can I make a request? Can you make the exact git, hg and bzr repos you used available? I'd like to run some more performance tests using them. More on this at the end of this email. OK, some feedback on the comparison table you presented: 1. bzr EOL conversion support is under active development by me. My hope is that Bazaar will support this in 1.6. (We're packaging the 1.5rc tomorrow so it will miss that.) 2. Partial checkout support is also planned. See http://bazaar-vcs.org/FilteredViews. 3. Per file commit. You can record per file commit messages, in addition to the overall commit message, using bzr-gtk. 4. Rebase/Queues. These are both really well supported by Bazaar plugins. See http://bazaar-vcs.org/Rebase, http://blogs.gnome.org/jamesh/2008/04/01/bzr-loom/ and http://bazaar-vcs.org/Documentation/LoomAsSmarterQuilt. 5. Web access. Bazaar is every bit as good as git and hg here. In fact, it's far easier to set up static serving over http using Bazaar than Git. Static http serving is also *much* faster in bzr than in hg. I suspect bzr is quicker than Git here as well (given our smaller repo size for many projects) though I'm yet to measure that. 6. I agree that gitweb and hgweb are currently ahead of bzr's options. Loggerhead - you didn't include that in your table - is pretty good though if a bit annoying to set up. 7. Under cool extensions, you should mention shelf - part of BzrTools. (I believe it's directly comparable with git-stash.) bzr-dbus and bzr-ahavi are also really cool for hackers when sprinting. 8. TortoiseBzr is a Windows tool, not a Linux one. It is currently under active development. See http://doc.bazaar-vcs.org/bzr.dev/developers/tortoise-strategy.html. 9. Before Tortoise matures, WildcatBZR is probably the best option right now for an integrated GUI. It's been tested on OS X and XP and ought to run on Linux as well. See http://sorn.net/projects/wildcat-bzr/about.php. 10. Submodules are supported in Bazaar by a related tools called ConfigManager. See http://bazaar-vcs.org/3rdPartyTools. This is a common need and we don't cover it yet in the User Guide. I need to address that soon. 11. In the Migration section (which probably should be called Interoperability instead?), I'm curious as to why you marked Bazaar down versus the competition. We believe bzr-svn is actually the leading option here. See http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.gnome.desktop/36309. Performance. Thanks for your benchmarking. I'm particularly curious about the clone figures though: most of my benchmarking puts Bazaar clone ahead of git clone. Did you use a shared repository? I'd be happy to repeat your tests (and expand them) using a shared repo if you make the hg and git repos you used available. I've also expanded http://bazaar-vcs.org/Benchmarks to include a place to reference independent benchmarks of Bzr vs Git vs Hg performance. Please feel free to add your article there. So what section. I'd be very happy to update the BzrVsGit and BzrVsHg pages on our Wiki if you'd point out which bits are incorrect. These pages aren't there to "bash" the competition: they are there to point out our strengths, and to provide links we can point (the never ending stream of) people to whom ask us why they ought to use Bazaar. As well as being the right thing to do ethically, it's absolutely in our interest to ensure those pages are defensible. Please help us by pointing out explicitly why you think they are "not-all-true". Ian C.