Re: VCS comparison table

Carl Worth wrote:

On Sat, 21 Oct 2006 19:42:47 -0400, Jeff Licquia wrote:

quoted

I don't think so.  Recently, I've been trying to track a particular
patch in the kernel.  It was done as a series of commits, and probably
would have been its own branch in bzr, but when I was trying to group
the commits together to analyze them as a group, the easiest way to do
that was by the original committer's name.

As far as "its own branch in bzr" would such a branch remain available
indefinitely even after being merged in to the main tree?

quoted

Now, there's probably a better way to hunt that stuff down, but in this
case hunting the user down worked for me.  (It may have made a
difference that I was using gitweb instead of a local clone.)

Vast, huge, gaping, cosmic difference.

Almost none of the power of git is exposed by gitweb. It's really not
worth comparing. (Now a gitweb-alike that provided all the kinds of
very easy browsing and filtering of the history like gitk and git
might be nice to have.)

There was one, but it got discontinued due to performance issues. Shame that, because it would have been nice to have to show "foreign" visitors how gitk/qgit works. It would especially show the way git thinks about branches and stuff like that.

-- 
Andreas Ericsson                   andreas.ericsson@op5.se
OP5 AB                             www.op5.se