From: Martin Langhoff <martin.langhoff@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2006 21:40:06 GMT
Subject: Re: git and bzr
Message-ID: <46a038f90611281340u521fb5fct745ebe1ded9a630e@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <456C9DFF.1040407@onlinehome.de>

On 11/29/06, Nicholas Allen <nick.allen@onlinehome.de> wrote:
> Having not used git I can't really say whether git is better than bzr or
> not in this regard. I know in the kind of development I do the case
> where a file with the same name has been added independantly in 2
> different branches is a pretty rare one. Usually, when it has happened
> the files should have been 2 separate files with different names anyway
> - so bzr would have no problem with this.

Not so rare in a true DSCM scenario where people submit patches via
email or a bug tracker. Say two developers apply the same patch to
their trees, and one of them tweaks it a bit. While I don't personally
do kernel development, I understand that's reasonably common in the
linux dev team.

It also happens quite a bit if you cherry pick across branches patches
that create files.

In such cases, I find GIT does the right thing 99% of the time,
including spotting situations where the file got added at different
patchlevels in different branches.

cheers,