From: Erik Bågfors Date: Sat, 21 Oct 2006 16:35:18 GMT Subject: Re: VCS comparison table Message-ID: <845b6e870610210935y2a97398enf18e17c41f123907@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: On 10/21/06, Sean wrote: > On Sat, 21 Oct 2006 18:19:54 +0200 > "Erik Bågfors" wrote: > > > This is just plain wrong. > > > > bzr is a fully decentralized VCS. I've read this thread for quite some > > time now and I really cannot understand why people come to this > > conclusion. > > > > However, if you do want to work centralized, bzr has commands that > > fits that workflow really good. > > Have you been reading this thread at all? Yes. > Even the bzr people have now > stated rather firmly that the revno scheme doesn't work very well in > a number of situations. Numerous examples have been given where the > revno will be useless, or worse misleading when bzr is used without > a central server. The answer from the bzr folks has been then don't > use the revno in those situations. However, it's quite clear from the > bzr UI that there is a _bias_ towards using revno's. > > So yes, clearly you can use bzr without a central server; but it's just > as clearly biased against such usage. So... I do agree that revnos might not fit perfectly in at all times. But that they automatically mean that bzr is not a decentralized VCS, I strongly disagree with. They are just one part of the equation. /Erik -- google talk/jabber. zindar@gmail.com SIP-phones: sip:erik_bagfors@gizmoproject.com sip:17476714687@proxy01.sipphone.com