[IPython-user] Problem doing svn co behind proxy

David Cournapeau david@ar.media.kyoto-u.ac...
Mon Aug 13 05:59:58 CDT 2007

Fernando Perez wrote:
> On 8/13/07, David Cournapeau <david@ar.media.kyoto-u.ac.jp> wrote:
>> I don't know the size of envisage, but I know that bzr with numpy and
>> scipy, with the full history, is faster to get log and so on than svn
>> (this is of course due to network latency, but concretely, those are
>> useful advantages of DVCS). I tried both hg and bzr on big projects to
>> get an idea (kernel size), and I found both of them unusable for those
>> tree size (i.e. knowing which files changed takes more than 1-2 seconds,
>> commit are really slow, etc...).
>> Anyway, this is all moot without "hard numbers".  V. Vaino suggested a
>> script to use hg, I can try to do something for bzr on my side, and then
>> we can compare them and you can make the decision according to those
>> results . Would this be considered useful ? (again, I do not care about
>> bzr vs hg; I am more familiar with bzr, but I believe the advantages of
>> DVCS, specially for projects around scipy, to largely outweight any
>> difference between bzr and hg)
> I'm inclined to go with hg because:
> - As Ville mentioned, at least on the net there seems to be a lot of
> evidence of the speed difference between hg and bzr being huge.

Well, let's say that's not my experience, then :) For big trees, bzr is 
unusable, no question about it; I didn't find hg to be super fast either 
on big trees (linux kernel). But ipython can hardly be considered as a 
big tree. The main author of bzr-svn, which is the equivalent of hgsvn, 
uses it to hack on samba, which is arguably much bigger than ipython.

Anyway, all the reasons you mention are certainly valid. Again, I do not 
want to push bzr; just mention it because it can import svn trees and 
make them available through http, which was the problem I suggested bzr 
for :).



More information about the IPython-user mailing list