Emacs Bazaar repository

[David Kastrup]

John Arbash Meinel <john at arbash-meinel.com> writes:

> The biggest reason 'bzr log' is slow is because we spend some time
> analyzing the ancestry to give a "pretty" view, while git/hg do not.

git most certainly does.

> Specifically, when you do "bzr log" we traverse the ancestry to figure
> out when revisions were merged, etc.

What makes you think git doesn't?

> I believe plain "git log" just starts outputting the revisions as it
> encounters them, and "hg log" also outputs them as they are stored.

git has a large variety of options for selecting order and subset and
relation of what to output to the log.

It is still fast, even while doing rename/copying detection on the fly.

> (I believe 'git log' defaults to showing the log based on a local sort
> by date. Neither one tries to figure out that A1 and A2 were merged
> into tip, which is another step that 'bzr log' does.)

I suggest you actually check your beliefs against the actual program.
"The reason the other software is faster must be because it sucks in
comparison to ours." is a fallacy.  git has been developed by a set of
kernel-savvy developers working on a large code base with a necessity
for high speed (Linus merges several hundred patches from different
repositories daily).

-- 
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum