Eficiency [Re: comparison with mercurial?]

[Jérôme Marant]

Quoting Kevin Smith <yarcs at qualitycode.com>:

...
> My own distributed SCM journey has been: darcs -> monotone -> ArX ->
> mercurial -> bzr. For me, bzr wins over mercurial because the bzr team
> is committed to:
>
> 1. Cheap http-only repo publishing (allowing all developers to be equal
> participants regardless of financial status)
>
> 2. Centralized storage (allowing cheap branches on older Win98 machines,
> and any other non-hardlink filesystem)

I did some comparisons in terms of efficiency and it looks like mercurial
is currently much faster than bzr.

>From the same source (the IceWM source), with mercurial 0.7 and bzr 0.1.1

- The initial commit of sources (after adding all files) is 4 times faster
with mercurial
- Local branching of sources is 6 times faster with mercurial
- Branching via HTTP (old-http from mercurial) is 3 times faster with mercurial

That said, I'm still interested in bzr.

Are there some hopes to see bzr efficiency improved anytime soon, and how?

Thanks.




--
Jérôme Marant