Brief article on benchmarks of Python repository with leading DVCSen
Paul Moore
p.f.moore at gmail.com
Wed Feb 11 17:58:18 GMT 2009
2009/2/11 Barry Warsaw <barry at python.org>:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On Feb 11, 2009, at 11:44 AM, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
>
>> The Python developers have *no interest whatsoever* in a "fair"
>> comparison. They want a comparison in workflows that have the
>> absolute minimum differences from their current workflows. (Note the
>> plural here; that's important. Workflows differ substantially between
>> committers and non-committers, and even within each of those classes.)
>
> This is an interesting point, because I think there's a vocal few core
> committers who see no reason to switch from Subversion at all. To me, this
> is short sighted because I'd like to give non-core committers all the
> benefits that core committers have... well, short of being able to commit to
> the official branches of course.
OK, here's a question. Given the existence of the current "unofficial"
DVCS branches, what benefits are there to non-core committers of the
core moving to a DVCS?
My main concern, as a non-core developer, is that an official decision
on a DVCS will to an extent result in the *other* DVCS branches dying
off, or becoming unmaintained. So, as a non-core developer, I have to
contend with the fact that a decision on a DVCS may exert pressure on
me to move to using that DVCS, at least for Python work.
And there's the problem - I use Mercurial happily at the moment, and
my interest in Bazaar is essentially to verify that should what I
describe above happen with Bazaar as the chosen option[1], having to
use Bazaar won't be so uncomfortable that I lose interest in
contributing to Python.
If someone confirmed that regardless of which DVCS was chosen, a
maintained, up to date Mercurial mirror of Python would be provided
(and that patch submission processes would remain VCS-neutral) then
I'd stop bothering.
All of which, if I think about it, explains why I keep coming across
in discussions like this as anti-Bazaar - even though in practice I'm
not.
> It still means that the core committers need to be sold on the use of dvcs's
> in general, and the specific choice in particular. But we also have to
> advocate on behalf of those that aren't part of the discussion at all, i.e.
> the non-core developers.
Only to the extent that the current situation, of non-core developers
having access to reliable (if "unofficial") mirrors for their DVCS of
choice, is likely to change.
Paul.
[1] I daren't even contemplate the possibility of git being chosen, as
I have never been able to get past the initial "install, try, ugh, run
away screaming" impression I get of git on Windows... :-)
More information about the bazaar
mailing list