On Fri, 2007-26-10 at 14:13 +0200, Dr. Peter Poeml wrote:
On Fri, Oct 26, 2007 at 10:38:40AM +0200, Cornelius Schumacher wrote:
On Thursday 25 October 2007, Dr. Peter Poeml wrote:
BTW, I would find it a interesting exercise to look at hg (rather than git) in order to find out whether it can be married with osc somehow, or vice versa. But integration with git would also be possible I guess.
Because of what reasons do you think would be hg more suitable for being used in the context of osc, only because it's also written in Python or are there other reasons as well?
1) for integration reasons -- there should be some potential, although I haven't looked into it. hg and osc are both pretty modular I guess, and at least osc can be imported as a python module, so maybe it is possible to add "osc" commands to hg -- or make osc use native hg storage.
I'd be very happy if we could use hg. Its ui seems sane, etc. For similar reasons (ease of use, correctness, written in python, etc), I'd also be happy if you chose bzr.
2) hg has a single and (supposedly) maintainable codebase, whereas git started out as a myriad of independent tools (that may be a thing of the past, I don't know). Calling external tools all the time and parsing their output gets boring pretty quickly... especially if the tools are not stabilized and are still changed all the time, as seems to happen with git.
In spite of whatever impressions I may have given earlier, I'm no fan of git, even if I do think it'd be an advance over the svn-like parts of osc. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+help@opensuse.org