bzr on Emacs performance suggestions

Ben Finney ben+bazaar at benfinney.id.au
Thu Nov 26 03:42:08 GMT 2009


"Stephen J. Turnbull" <stephen at xemacs.org> writes:

> Yada yada yada. But I've got bad news, worse news, and a couple
> suggestions for you.
>
> The bad news is reported elsewhere: performance is visibly poor
> compared to git.

It still seems relevant to point out, wherever this crops up, that
“Bazaar versus CVS” is the relevant comparison for the Emacs repository,
since Git is not an option AIUI.

> The worse news: git's standard infrastructure is in place even though
> it's at best going to be a mirror.  bzr offers only basic html and
> sftp access

To be clear, I think you're saying “Savannah only offers basic HTML and
SFTP access to Bazaar repositories, and does not enable Bazaar's ability
for faster network protocols”. That is, it's not Bazaar with the
offerings limited this way. (I know you knew that, but this thread is an
otherwise-useful summary and I wanted the record clear.)

> and for the version savannah-hackers clearly intends to use whatever
> is in Debian stable. Currently that's Bzr 1.17, I think.

Far older <URL:http://packages.debian.org/lenny/bzr>: Lenny has version
‘1.5-1.1’ of the ‘bzr’ package.

> This probably doesn't matter for dumb transports, but haven't
> improvements been made in the smart protocol on the server side, too?
> Ie, it's not clear that it will improve before the repo goes "live".

I would certainly not want Bazaar version 1.5 to be the one Emacs
hackers work with in 2009. Is there any prospect of getting Bazaar 2
installed?

-- 
 \          “That's all very good in practice, but how does it work in |
  `\                                             *theory*?” —anonymous |
_o__)                                                                  |
Ben Finney




More information about the bazaar mailing list