Usage discussion from the GNU Emacs project.

Óscar Fuentes ofv at wanadoo.es
Fri Nov 27 03:02:06 GMT 2009


Ben Finney <ben+bazaar at benfinney.id.au> writes:

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

[snip]

>> What I'm complaining about here is bzr fans complaining about the "bzr
>> is slow" meme. Something needs to be done about that.
>
> Well, for a long time, there was significant merit in such a claim. A
> lot of energy went into making newer versions of Bazaar so that claim
> could be falsified.

My experience says that bazaar is okay for small branches. With 1000
revisions and linear history, for instance, there is a noticeable delay
on every operation. Most of the time I need to stop two or tree seconds
waiting for bazaar to finish, but this is tolerable. However, some time
experimentating with the emacs branch changed my opinion about the claim
"bazaar mostly solved its performance problems".

So the emphasis on improving performance must go on, otherwise bazaar
will be restricted to small projects.

On the other hand, I see here much discussion about clone
performance. That's not the most serious performance problem, and for me
it is not bad enough to ditch bazaar. However, in the present state, I
can not recommend bazaar to projects who are exploring alternatives to
CVS or Subversion if their history contain tens of thousands of
revisions.

[snip]

> The situation seems significantly improved, *if* those efforts at
> improvement can actually be taken advantage of. Sticking with Bazaar 1.5
> on Savannah isn't going to make many Emacs developers happy; it seems
> you agree.

AFAIK, Savannah is running 1.17. Using this version with its support of
2a format was the main cause for the long delay between the decission of
using bazaar and the first experiments with it.

[snip]

-- 
Óscar




More information about the bazaar mailing list