Jan Nieuwenhuizen wrote:
However, I very much argued in favour of bazaar, for the very
reasons you cite. The bazaar project has as usability, ease of
use and good documentation as a prime goal -- and also does
very well in these areas -- much unlike git. Although git has
improved a bit here and there, its commands and esp. arguments
are still a complete mess, whereas bzr has made grand strides
performance-wise.
Since we switched to GIT I have been looking into getting a bzr
mirror up for our git sources at launchpad.net, from time to time,
a new effort just failed.
I can offer some doc-contributor, non-programmer perspective here.
I recently wrote a manpage for a project managed by bazaar, and
while some of it seemed easier, more intuitive, I found that it
didn't handle merging very well. For example, after making a
change and committing it, upon the next pull it would tell me
there was a conflict, then I ran the command to fix the conflict
and it would say "conflict resolved successfully," (great!) only
to have exactly the same conflict arise next time I pulled, even
after I made no changes at all. Very frustrating. At least when
this happens on git I can pick a spot to reset my branch to.
Still it might be worth trying bzr with Lilypond, as it's possible
my problems were noob-related. Right now I'm more comfortable
with git, if you can believe that. :) bzr has many of the same
commands (or the same sorts of commands) and I think would cause
the same sorts of problems for doc contributors who aren't used to
using *any* kind of revision control system.
Another observation: the command to create a patch on bzr is prone
to mistakes. It took me a few tries to get it right. "git
format-patch origin" is much easier than what you type on bzr.
Example: here's the command I had to type make a patch for the
manpage for this project:
bzr diff -r29..30 sap.1 > manpage.patch
Now, it worked, but to me this is harder than git. It's sort of an
important part of the process, too, if we want doc contributors
making their own patches.
my summary: bzr might be better-looking (at first), but it's not
as smart as git and not really that much easier to use, at least
for the things someone like me does.
Also it's very awkward to type "bzr" on a U.S. keyboard--a minor
thing but annoying nonetheless. It'd be easier on a German layout
or maybe some others.
Jon
--
Jonathan Kulp
http://www.jonathankulp.com
_______________________________________________
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
