[Numpy-discussion] Moving away from svn ?

Ondrej Certik ondrej@certik...
Fri Jan 4 12:45:06 CST 2008

On Jan 4, 2008 5:56 PM, David Cournapeau <cournape@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jan 5, 2008 1:30 AM, Charles R Harris <charlesr.harris@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > I like Mercurial and use it a lot, but I'm not convinced we have enough
> > developers and code to justify the pain of changing the VCS at this time.
> I don't understand the number of developers argument: on most of the
> projects I am working on, I am the only developer, and I much prefer
> bzr to svn, although for reasons which are not really relevant to a
> project like numpy/scipy.
> > SVN g!enerally works well and has good support on Windows through tortoise.
> That's where I don't agree: I don't think svn works really well. As
> long as you use it as an history backup, it works ok, but that's it.
> The non functional merge makes branching almost useless, reverting
> back in time is extremely cumbersome,
> > Mercurial also has tortoise support these days, but I haven't ever used it
> > and can't comment on it. In fact, I've never even used Mercurial on windows,
> > perhaps someone can relate their experiences with it. I suppose a shift
> > might be justified if there is a lot of branch merging and such in our
> > future. Anyone know what folks are working in branches?
> Well, I started this discussion because of the scikits discussion. A
> typical use of branches is for sandboxes: it makes a lot of sense to
> use branches instead of sandboxes. Also, when branching actually
> works, you really start using many branches: I do it all the time on
> all my projects, and I am the only developer on most of them. It means
> that you commit smaller changes (because comitting does not mean
> makeing your changes available to the trunk), and instead of
> submitting one big changeset, you actually submit a serie of small
> changes. This really makes a big difference IMHO. Also, things like
> log, blame are actually usable, since they are much faster on DVCS.
> For something like scipy (less for numpy), where many people develop
> different things, I think it really makes a lot of sense to use a
> DVCS. I actually think scipy to be more distributed in nature than
> many open source projects (again, this is much less true for numpy,
> IMHO).

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.

Subversion sucks not only in the merge thing, but especially when
providing patches. Because most of the people don't have access to the
and not being able to commit locally (=work incrementally), is just
bad. So, I use mercurial even when providing patches for svn.


More information about the Numpy-discussion mailing list