Re: numpy 1.2.1, switching to git?
> On Thu, Dec 18, 2008 at 9:07 PM, Monty Taylor wrote: > > /me whinges that switching to bzr for packaging in general would be a > > much nicer thing overall, since then ubuntu downstream is pretty well > > bzr... > > > > (note: I use bzr for all of my other projects, so I have a vested interest) > > > > However... _anything_ is an improvement over svn. > > Matthias also wrote me offlist, that he either prefers to stay in svn, > or use bzr, but not git (if I understood well). > > The problem with bzr is that it seems to me it is mainly used in > Ubuntu, but that's about it. Also compare for example the number of > packages in the respective vcs: My personal preference ordering would probably be: hg, bzr, svn, git -- mithrandi, i Ainil en-Balandor, a faer Ambar signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: numpy 1.2.1, switching to git?
Monty Taylor wrote: > /me whinges that switching to bzr for packaging in general would be a > much nicer thing overall, since then ubuntu downstream is pretty well > bzr... unfortunatelt I don't know why they use bzr as it is really ugly to use (that's just my subjective opinion, please don't start a flame war now) Switching to git would be a good thing, but only if most people of the team are ok with the switch. -- Bernd Zeimetz Debian GNU/Linux Developer GPG Fingerprint: 06C8 C9A2 EAAD E37E 5B2C BE93 067A AD04 C93B FF79 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-python-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: numpy 1.2.1, switching to git?
On Sat, Dec 20, 2008 at 06:43:19PM +0100, Bernd Zeimetz wrote: > Monty Taylor wrote: > > /me whinges that switching to bzr for packaging in general would be a > > much nicer thing overall, since then ubuntu downstream is pretty well > > bzr... > unfortunatelt I don't know why they use bzr Because bzr was developed in conjunction with Ubuntu? :) (This might mean Ubuntu is somewhat biased in favor of bzr; OTOH, it also means that bzr developers are responsive to the needs of Ubuntu developers.) > as it is really ugly to use Ugly how? > (that's just my subjective opinion, please don't start a flame war now) It's a rather strongly worded opinion; if you want to avoid flame wars, you might find it helpful to bring specific criticisms to the table instead of just declaring a solution "ugly". :) Slinking back into the shadows of debian-python, -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. Ubuntu Developerhttp://www.debian.org/ slanga...@ubuntu.com vor...@debian.org -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-python-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: numpy 1.2.1, switching to git?
Steve Langasek wrote: > >> (that's just my subjective opinion, please don't start a flame war now) > > It's a rather strongly worded opinion; if you want to avoid flame wars, you > might find it helpful to bring specific criticisms to the table instead of > just declaring a solution "ugly". :) ++ > Slinking back into the shadows of debian-python, -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-python-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: numpy 1.2.1, switching to git?
On Sat, Dec 20, 2008 at 7:49 PM, Steve Langasek wrote: > On Sat, Dec 20, 2008 at 06:43:19PM +0100, Bernd Zeimetz wrote: >> Monty Taylor wrote: >> > /me whinges that switching to bzr for packaging in general would be a >> > much nicer thing overall, since then ubuntu downstream is pretty well >> > bzr... > >> unfortunatelt I don't know why they use bzr > > Because bzr was developed in conjunction with Ubuntu? :) (This might mean > Ubuntu is somewhat biased in favor of bzr; OTOH, it also means that bzr > developers are responsive to the needs of Ubuntu developers.) > >> as it is really ugly to use > > Ugly how? > >> (that's just my subjective opinion, please don't start a flame war now) > > It's a rather strongly worded opinion; if you want to avoid flame wars, you > might find it helpful to bring specific criticisms to the table instead of > just declaring a solution "ugly". :) Well, it's just slow once you get used to git and how fast it is, it really sucks to wait for basic operations like "bzr di". See e.g. my comparison here: http://www.selenic.com/pipermail/mercurial/2008-August/021009.html But as Bernd said, let's not start a flamewar about this. But I think it's useful to see what all the debian-python developers think. As I told Matthias offlist, we should only switch to git if most of developers are fine with that. Yeah, but since we are talking about that --- Steve, do you really think that bzr has any future? I know that Ubuntu is using it a lot, and couple other projects (mostly hosted on Launchpad), but that's about it. Git, on the other hand, is used a lot in Debian, and in a lot of other projects. Also you have many places on the internet to store your repository (github, gitorious, git.debian.org, ...). As to mercurial Tristan, I don't know if you actually ever used hg-buildpackage, but it is written in Haskell (!) and see my blog post here: http://ondrejcertik.blogspot.com/2007/10/mercurial-vs-git-for-managing-debian.html it's not really well polished (well, of course, because not a lot of people are using it, compared to git-buildpackage). Anyway, besides stating which vcs one likes, this is mostly a debate over a beer in Prague, but well, why not, I just had several of them. Ondrej -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-python-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: numpy 1.2.1, switching to git?
Steve Langasek wrote: > On Sat, Dec 20, 2008 at 06:43:19PM +0100, Bernd Zeimetz wrote: >> Monty Taylor wrote: >>> /me whinges that switching to bzr for packaging in general would be a >>> much nicer thing overall, since then ubuntu downstream is pretty well >>> bzr... > >> unfortunatelt I don't know why they use bzr > > Because bzr was developed in conjunction with Ubuntu? :) (This might mean > Ubuntu is somewhat biased in favor of bzr; OTOH, it also means that bzr > developers are responsive to the needs of Ubuntu developers.) Actually I didn't know that it was developed by Ubuntu people, all I know is that Ubuntu uses bzr everywhere. After using cvs, svn, arch, bzr, darcs, git and other weird things I prefer git - although it has a steep learning curve, it is much more intuitive to use at the end, comes with a *lot* more features and is much faster than all other tools. From the idea how a distributed revision control system should work darcs is still my favourite - unfortunately I had way too much trouble with bugs when using it and it is missing a lot of features compared with git, so I don't use it anymore. My opinion based on the daily use von the tools is really subjective as all tools do the job they should do most of the time, but using git is just less pain at the end - although I have to admit that it scared me a bit at the beginning. -- Bernd Zeimetz Debian GNU/Linux Developer GPG Fingerprint: 06C8 C9A2 EAAD E37E 5B2C BE93 067A AD04 C93B FF79 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-python-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: ITP: Name for "real" python-pgsql module
Paweł Tęcza wrote: > So, I'm affraid that packaging of python-pypgsql module is necessary > in that situation. I'm not a Python programmer and don't want to change > the sources. Well.. you could ask upstream. Actually I'd vote against adding just another PG binding as the others implement the DB api well and work well - so as long as I can't see any additional features pypgsql brings, I'm not conviced to sponsor it. -- Bernd Zeimetz Debian GNU/Linux Developer GPG Fingerprint: 06C8 C9A2 EAAD E37E 5B2C BE93 067A AD04 C93B FF79 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-python-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
