How is Bazaar-NG related to Bazaar and Arch in general?
aaron.bentley at utoronto.ca
Wed Jun 1 14:50:39 BST 2005
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
|>>>>>"Sean" == Sean Russell <ser-bazaar at ser1.net> writes:
| Sean> I'm guessing that the developers of Bazaar originally
| Sean> forked Arch to add some functionality, and then came to the
| Sean> it needed a fresh rewrite in a higher-level language to
remove many of the
| Sean> architectural limitations of Arch. So they started Bazaar-NG.
This is basically right. At one of the Baz code sprints, Canonical
brought in Martin, who was not, at the time, on Canonical's staff. They
just wanted some ideas from a smart guy who's done a lot of deep
thinking on distributed revision control.
Martin's conclusions were that some of Gnu Arch's warts were inherent in
the model it used-- that no Arch implementation could really be
user-friendly. I arrived at the code sprint somewhat later, and by this
time, Martin was already designing a new revision control system, which
went through several names, including $PROJECT.
| Does that mean that development on Bazaar is now stalled, with all
| manpower invested in Bazaar-NG ?
Not at all. Martin was hired specifically for Bazaar-NG, and all the
Baz team is still working exclusively on Baz. Bazaar-NG has attracted a
few of the non-Canonical Baz developers like John Meinel and myself, though.
Baz represents the 'evolutionary' approach-- it's a fork of Gnu Arch
that is evolving into an implementation of Bazaar-NG, while staying
backwards-compatible with Arch. Bazaar-NG represents the
'revolutionary' approach-- a from-scratch implementation. Baz is a more
stable system, while baz-ng has more room for experimentation. For now,
there's a need for both to be actively developed. Both roads will lead
to the same place, eventually.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.5 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
More information about the bazaar