Hi Adeodato, On Mon, Mar 2, 2009 at 11:37 AM, Adeodato Simó <d...@net.com.org.es> wrote: > * Ondrej Certik [Mon, 02 Mar 2009 11:07:25 -0500]: > >> >> I have never used stacked branches, but are you sure you can only >> >> branch the repository data related to a subset of the working tree >> >> only ? My understanding is that bzr stacked branches are useful to >> >> avoid downloading the whole history, but that you still need to get >> >> the whole project. I think it would be very difficult to support the >> >> usual features of DVCS without it ? > >> > If you don't want the project history, then you can use lightweight >> > checkouts, which are essentially equivalent to SVN checkouts (you get a >> > local working copy, but no local branch or repository). > >> Ah, so you basically only get the local working copy, but *no* bzr >> repository, right? Well, with git, you can get this over the web >> interface, so we may write a simple (Python:) script to download this >> for you from the commandline. Maybe someone did this already. > > No, that interpretation is not correct. > > I'm going to explain the three involved concepts, in hopes that it will > be useful for this discussion, or for future instances of this discussion. > I'll (concisely) explain Bazaar's lightweight checkouts, Bazaar's stacked > branches, and what Git has to offer in this area.
Thanks a lot for taking time to write this, now it's clear to me that git is inferior in this particular point to bazaar, I agree with you. You made very good points, thanks for that. On Mon, Mar 2, 2009 at 3:44 PM, Steve Langasek <vor...@debian.org> wrote: > My rebuttal is that if git is technical superior to bazaar because bazaar > has a mechanism to create repositories with only partial history, then No, I think Adeodato addressed this in his follow up email: " > I'm not claiming that Git's design is overall inferior than Bazaar's. In > fact, I quite much like it. > > I'm just saying that Bazaar can provide full-fledged branches that don't > physically contain all history data, and Git cannot, and in my view that's > a disadvantage and an inferiority *in that particular point*. " > bazaar is technically superior to git because git has rebasing as a > first-class feature. Just to make sure -- you meant it as a joke, right? Sometimes I am a little unsure over emails. :) On Mon, Mar 2, 2009 at 4:20 PM, Cyril Brulebois <k...@debian.org> wrote: > Steve Langasek <vor...@debian.org> (02/03/2009): >> My rebuttal is that if git is technical superior to bazaar because >> bazaar has a mechanism to create repositories with only partial >> history, then bazaar is technically superior to git because git has >> rebasing as a first-class feature. > > Oh my HEAD, it hurts. I didn't get this reply at all, besides HEAD being the git's top commit. I think my humor senses are sleeping today, sorry guys, I hope to improve tomorrow. :) Anyway, good discussion, please keep going, I find it very useful. Ondrej -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-python-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
