How is Bazaar-NG related to Bazaar and Arch in general?

Aaron Bentley at
Wed Jun 1 14:50:39 BST 2005

Hash: SHA1

hugues wrote:
|>>>>>"Sean" == Sean Russell <ser-bazaar at> writes:
|     Sean> I'm guessing that the developers of Bazaar originally
|     Sean> forked Arch to add some functionality, and then came to the
conclusion that
|     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.

Version: GnuPG v1.2.5 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird -


More information about the bazaar mailing list