Brian Downing wrote:
> I don't suppose you could configure your gateway (or gitweb, which may
> be the better choice) to accommodate the fairly common SBCL log message
> style of:
> All you see in the gitweb log is "version:", which isn't terribly useful.
Right, that would be good. Will look into it. The repository is named
sbcl-beta for a reason, after all (-;
> (I seem to remember we hacked up something for this for the Arch
> Also, why git? :)
For me, it's these reasons:
1 It allows "what is the next revision after the one I'm currently
seeing"-type queries, which are pretty much a necessity for the
2 It's much faster (on clone, commit, status) than everything else I
tried. It doesn't run out of memory on the sbcl tree, either.
3 Its conversion tools are awesome. For example, git-cvsimport imports
/ever/ branch, ever. It even groks merge points, to some extent.
Most other VC systems (besides CVS, obviously) rely on tailor, which
succeeds in driving me up the wall, but not in much else concerning
the sbcl repository, really (:
4 Oh, and the documentation (available at http://git.or.cz, and on the
command line) is accurate and helpful.
In my tests, arch succeeds in 1, darcs succeeds in 4, mercurial and
monotone rank second in 2, and bzr succeeds ... nowhere. These rankings
are somewhat subjective, of course (:
So, git it is for me; and for you, should you choose to use it.
Andreas Fuchs, (http://|im:asf@...>, antifuchs