Re: [VOTE] git versus mercurial

From: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
Date: Oct 28, 2008, 14:28 UTC
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.1.00.0810281445190.22125@pacific.mpi-cbg.de.mpi-cbg.de>
In-Reply-To: <ge70nl$l6t$1@ger.gmane.org>

Hi,

On Tue, 28 Oct 2008, walt wrote:

Show 12 quoted lines

> walt wrote:
> > No, no, I'm not the one calling for a vote.  You old-timers here will 
> > know the name Matt Dillon, who is leading the dragonflybsd project 
> > (www.dragonflybsd.org).
> >
> > Matt is the one who is calling for the vote in his thread "Vote for 
> > your source control system" in the dragonfly.kernel group, accessible 
> > via nntp://nntp.dragonflybsd.org...
> 
> The official vote was 19 to 19, plus one for perforce and one for svn.  
> Matt has proposed a primary git repository and a mirror in hg, and 
> that's being debated now.

While many may say that that is a half-baked solution, I actually like it. Mercurial and Git are pretty similar in their concept (if not in how the data is actually stored).

Note that with git fast-export and hg fast-import, it should be relatively simple to convert from one data format to the other, even incrementally.

And for the other direction, you could use hg fast-export from the fast-export.git repository (I am working on a better one at the moment, too, so that incremental fast-export would be possible, too).

Ciao, Dscho