Bazaar is ignored in some places?
Matt Nordhoff
mnordhoff at mattnordhoff.com
Fri Dec 14 00:59:17 GMT 2007
Nils Ackermann wrote:
> Here goes another round with the answers, thanks for all the input!
>
> The new texts are:
>
> ----------
>
> ** 3(d) Networking Support
>
> Excellent. Works natively over HTTP (read-only), FTP and SFTP without
> having Bazaar installed at the remote end. Works over HTTP, SSH and a
> custom protocol when talking to a remote Bazaar server. Supports RSYNC
> and WebDAV (experimental) through a plugin.
Trivial, but s/a plugin/plugins/.
> ** 3(e) Portability
>
> Works on MS Windows, Linux, Mac OS X, FreeBSD, UNIX, and basically on
> any system that has a recent Python port. With case-insensitive file
> systems there are minor issues that can be avoided by using a
> graphical frontend. On MS Windows there is a plugin to support
> tracking of symlinks even if they are not supported natively by the
> file system.
The case-insensitive FS issues aren't exactly minor (at least if you
don't understand them), but ok.
> ----------
>
> I'll ask the author of the comparison website to clarify his question
> about changesets.
>
> Google lists almost 50 pages linking to this comparison page; I think
> it's worthwhile to have Bazaar mentioned there.
>
> While checking some of these links I found this amusing article, where
> it is shown how much money one can save when using a commercial VCS
> instead of an open source VCS:
>
> http://www.upsideresearch.com/2006/12/free_software_configuration_ma.php
>
> Cheers,
> Nils
:-)
(BTW, OT, but what's what your "nils-dated-xxx" email addresses? Anti-spam?)
--
More information about the bazaar
mailing list