Re: [ANNOUNCE] Git wiki

[Shawn Pearce <spearce@spearce.org>]

Nicolas Pitre <nico@cam.org> wrote:
> On Wed, 3 May 2006, Paolo Ciarrocchi wrote:
> > On 5/3/06, Petr Baudis <pasky@suse.cz> wrote:
> > > Dear diary, on Wed, May 03, 2006 at 10:39:07AM CEST, I got a letter
> > > where Paolo Ciarrocchi <paolo.ciarrocchi@gmail.com> said that...
> > > > On 5/3/06, Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net> wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > BTW, do you know why GIT has not been selected as SCM for OpenSolaris?
> > > > (they choose Mercurial).
> > > 
> > > I think it's explained somewhere in their forums (or mailing lists or
> > > whatever they actually _are_).
> > 
> > I only found the announcement, not the rationales.
> 
> http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/tools-discuss/2006-April/000366.html
> 
> Looks like they didn't buy the argument about the uselessness of 
> recording file renames.

The final evaluations are available from here (at the very bottom
of the page):

  http://opensolaris.org/os/community/tools/scm/

It looks like Mercurial doesn't support renames either, but a lot
of users are asking for it to be supported.  So I don't think that's
the reason.  It looks more like they didn't enjoy porting GIT 1.2.2
(as 1.2.4 was found to not work in all cases) to Solaris and the
tester ran into some problems with the conflict resolution support.

My own reading of the two final evaluations for GIT and Mercurial
leaves me feeling like GIT is a more mature tool which is faster
and more stable then Mercurial.  GIT seemed to be more reliable
during testing then Mercurial was, despite the cloning issue.
Which makes me surprised that OpenSolaris selected Mercurial instead.


-- 
Shawn.