[Ffmpeg-devel] SVN dump
Mon Apr 16 02:10:04 CEST 2007
On Sun, Apr 15, 2007 at 07:29:19PM -0400, Rich Felker wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 16, 2007 at 12:08:04AM +0200, Aurelien Jacobs wrote:
> > On Sun, 15 Apr 2007 12:33:14 -0700 (PDT)
> > Trent Piepho <xyzzy at speakeasy.org> wrote:
> > > On Sun, 15 Apr 2007, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Why don't just switch to GIT ? :) I wonder what does Michael thinks about it.
> > > >
> > > > main problem is i know very little about git
> > > > but iam surely in favor of getting rid of svn, ill move "learning git" a
> > > > little up in my todo list
> > >
> > > There is another SCM called Mercurial that is very similar to git. In some
> > > cases it is faster and in some slower. However, it is less complex and
> > > easier to use. There are few Linux kernel sub-systems (like v4l-dvb and
> > > ALSA) that use Mercurial for the project, and then export their patches
> > > upstream to git for inclusion in the kernel.
> > >
> > > They are both much better than svn. diff, annotate, log, etc. don't use a
> > > remote server and are far faster. It's also much nicer for devs who don't
> > > have commit access.
> > Absolutely agree.
> > A few interesting facts about Mercurial:
> > - size of the whole ffmpeg history: 14 MB
> > - size of a working directory (ie. the whole history + a full checkout):
> > 27 MB (to be compared to the 29 MB of a svn checkout which contains no
> > history)
> > - comparable speed to GIT
> > - less complex than GIT
> > - much better support for some plateform (namely win32) than GIT
> I'm opposed to Mercurial unless you're willing to write a portable
> implementation in C or Bourne shell + POSIX utils. I don't have Python
> and it's not terribly portable... Last time I tried to build it I
> remember it being hell...
i agree that the python dependancy is ugly but its IMO not an argument
against mercrial simply as very very few people are affected by it and
i belive thouse who are affected have the knowledge of compiling python
even if its hell :)
> Also, FWIW, I'd strongly prefer systems that can be used fully online,
> without having to keep a full local copy of the repo. I often use
> machines that don't have hundreds of megabytes (or worse) of space
> free for a local copy of the repo... both old machines and shells with
> limited quotas. CVS->SVN already made my source trees grow 2x and I'd
> rather not have them grow 100x on top of that...
according to what aurelien said above the full history in mercurial
together with a checkout is actually smaller then the "double" checkout
so space is if its a argument at all one in favor of git/mercurial
Michael GnuPG fingerprint: 9FF2128B147EF6730BADF133611EC787040B0FAB
Why not whip the teacher when the pupil misbehaves? -- Diogenes of Sinope
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
More information about the ffmpeg-devel