[Gnu-arch-users] Re: hmm. an alternative to a new maintainer. Hire your manager.

[Matthieu Moy]

"Alfred M\. Szmidt" <address@hidden> writes:

>    1) Teach a beginner how to use baz or tla. See how long it takes.
>
> Took me two days.

I consider this to be long.

One day, I've submitted a patch to a project using darcs. I had never
used Darcs before. I read a « tutorial » (I mean, a 4 lines long
explanation), created a branch, commited, sent the commit by email.
I've learnt how to do that in around 5 minutes.

> And now that Emacs supports commiting and stuff for tla, it makes it
> even easier.
>
>    2) Run "baz status" in a large tree. See how long it takes.
>
> A long time (this is a import of gcc 4.0.1), but how often do you need
> to know the status of the _whole_ tree?

Neither tla nor baz let you the choice. I whish you good luck if you
want to implement partial tree operations with tla or baz. It's
possible, today, all the developers who wanted to improve the tla
codebase considered that a complete rewrite was needed (including Tom
who started recv. The fact that you _call_ it GNU Arch 2 doesn't
change much to the fact that it's a different and incompatible
project).

I've just done an experiment: import the Bazaar sources and compare
bzr and baz. In this tree (relatively small, but still not too small),
baz status takes 4 seconds, bzr status takes 1 second. You have a
ratio of 4 (and bzr starts with a handicap: it's written in an
interpreted language).

And bzr *does* manage partial tree operations, so it wins twice here.
(I'm talking about bzr since I don't know the other well enough. I bet
git is at least as fast)

-- 
Matthieu