[Numpy-discussion] Moving away from svn ?
Charles R Harris
Fri Jan 4 13:50:31 CST 2008
On Jan 4, 2008 12:21 PM, David Cournapeau <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> On Jan 5, 2008 3:58 AM, Fernando Perez <email@example.com> wrote:
> > On Jan 4, 2008 11:45 AM, Ondrej Certik <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> > > David is 100% right, I fully support this. I would be just repeating
> > > what he says.
> > >
> > > Charles actually said another point in favor of Mercurial - it works
> > > on Windows (at least people say so), while git not that much (at least
> > > people say so). I never use Windows myself, so I don't know.
> > FWIW, we (ipython) have also gone around a few times on this, and
> > would like (at some point to switch to a DVCS as well). I think the
> > benefits are many, so I won't rehash it here, others have done it
> > well.
> > One point that hasn't been mentioned is how useful a DVCS is when
> > doing dev sprints: people can work and sync off their own private
> > repos without touching SVN, with lots and lots of cross-developer
> > information flow that doesn't affect the main server or even other
> > devs. In fact, when doing sprints I always end up making a local hg
> > repo just for that purpose, and then committing back to svn upstream
> > at the end of the sprint.
> > As much as git looks really good, the Windows issue is, I think, a
> > deal killer: last I checked support was poor, and I think our core dev
> > tools should be truly, 100% cross-platform without any discrimination
> > (kinda-sorta-works on platform X isn't enough).
> I agree. This is not enough, but for me, the following are non negotiable:
> - the tool must work on unix, mac os X and windows
> - the tool must be open source.
> I guess everyone agrees on those points anyway.
> > My vote so far is for hg, for performance reasons but also partly
> > because sage and sympy already use it, two projects I'm likely to
> > interact a lot with and that are squarely in line with the
> > ipython/numpy/scipy/matplotlib world. Since they went first and made
> > the choice, I'm happy to let that be a factor in my decision. I'd
> > rather use a tool that others in the same community are also using,
> > especially when the choice is a sound one on technical merit alone.
> I understand the "sumpy uses it" reason, it is definitely a factor.
> But I would rather have a more thorough study on the merits of each
> system. For example, being a user of bzr for a year and a half now, I
> think I have a pretty good idea on how it works, and its advantages.
> We could then decide on a set of attributes to compare, and people who
> knows about one tool could then tell about it.
At this point, it might be more efficient to ask if anyone has objections or
knows of any problems. I suspect that both hg and bzr probably do most of
what is needed. My own preference is hg because I have several years
experience with it, it has a long history with trac, and it is in pretty
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Numpy-discussion