Re: git and bzr
- From
Martin Langhoff <martin.langhoff@gmail.com>
- Date
- Nov 28, 2006, 22:14 UTC
- Message-ID
- <46a038f90611281414y165ed376r80e3dbc3c7888985@mail.gmail.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <456CADE9.7060503@onlinehome.de>
On 11/29/06, Nicholas Allen <nick.allen@onlinehome.de> wrote:
> yes I can see if you just use plain patches. In bzr though there are > bundles that store extra data along with the patch and if you use this > instead of a simple patch this will never be a problem as bzr can then > notice the same bundle being merged into 2 branches.
Well, there you start depending on everyone using bzr and providing metadata-added patches. Git is really good at dealing with scenarios where not everyone is using Git.. so the content-is-kind-and-metadata-be-damned pays off handsomely.
And the "scenarios where not everyone is using Git" are everytime that we are tracking a project that uses a different SCM. For me, the "killer-app" of git is that, as it does not rely on magic metadata, it is perfectly useful on projects that I track that use CVS or SVN.
I submit or commit patches upstream and git spots the commits being echoed back in just right because it does not rely on the metadata. Only on the content.
cheers,
martin