Re: Git mirrors

[Óscar Fuentes]

Juanma Barranquero <address@hidden> writes:

>>> git's supposed technical advantage over bzr is a matter of discussion.
>>
>> Perhaps, but that's not actually so important.  It's clear that git is
>> technically very good, that it's seen much wider adoption than any of
>> its competitors, and that it has the bulk of the mindshare in the
>> "distributed source control" arena.
>
> Perhaps, but I'm specifically countering Óscar's affirmation that bzr
> is a "technically inferior package".

Once upon a time Emacs decided to use a DVCS. Mercurial and Git were the
obvious choices. But... lo! Emacs chose a system that, at the time, was
unable to cope with the volume requirements of the project and had to
wait for more than a year until it was barely usable. Now, go and say to
any Git or Mercurial developer that bzr wasn't a technically inferior
choice.

The decision on Bzr was political, not technical, and now objections are
made to adding support for other Free tools as a service to those
contributors that consider them more convenient. What I'm saying is that
that does not send a friendly signal to other Free Software projects and
representing GNU as an unfriendly competitor of other Free tools harms
the cause of Free Software.

[snip]