Not a holy war - just some salient facts

[Adrian Buehlmann]

On 09.04.2010 01:38, Harry Putnam wrote:
> Adrian Buehlmann <adrian at cadifra.com> writes:
> 
>> On 09.04.2010 00:45, Harry Putnam wrote:
>>> Can some advanced user here list reasons why bazaar might be better
>>> than mercurial, for the usage described briefly below.
>>>
>>> Or, if merc would, in fact, be the better tool.
>>>
>>
>> I stopped looking at Bazaar after having seen how slow 'bzr check' is.
> 
> Was that across a wide area network, or is that kind of operation
> local?

All local.

>> But it seems a lot of users never check their repos. Otherwise I can't
>> explain why anyone ever would use bzr.
> 
> So, are you saying it has other problems, making it a poor choice?

I can't tell if it has other problems or not. I stopped looking at it
because of the poor bzr check performance, because reasonable verify
performance is a must have for me before even starting to consider using
a DVCS.

Being able to verify the integrity of a clone is one of the top reasons
why I switched to using a DVCS.

And I love having the history next to the sources everywhere. For one
product, I burn build trees onto DVD for reference. After switching from
Perforce to Mercurial, I noticed I had the full history on that DVD as
well because the .hg dir was just right there. Another backup. It just
happened.

>> Did they make any progress there in the mean time? How long takes a bzr
>> check of the Bazaar repo itself on your computer? (last time I checked
>> it roughly took 1.5 hours here, with very high CPU load while doing so).
> 
> I'm sorry I may have given the impression, I was familiar with bzr,
> but actually have NO experience with it.

But then, before looking at a DVCS, think of how to establish integrity
of your repos. Consider backup.

Then you will inevitably have to look at 'hg verify' and 'bzr check'.

Then maybe you will test 'bzr check' first before looking at anything else.