On Tue, Jul 12, 2005 at 09:44:35AM +0400, Dmitriy Nikitinskiy wrote: > Miles Bader wrote: > >2005/7/12, nick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > >>Wow. Mercurial really rocks! > >>They repository consume less space (2,069,732) than tla-1.x (2,994,487) > >>and revc (14,498,601) on same data. > >>It's faster than revc on same data. > > > > > >Can you comment on my impression that mercurial[*] seems to lack > >useful rename support? When I tried it, it treated renames as > >add+delete (which screws up merging). > > > >If true, it's a fatal flaw I think. > > > >[*] I earlier referred to it incorrectly as "mercury". > > I show this timings generally for Arch developers. > Why _small_ (distrib size 81760 bytes!), written on python > SCM with compressed delta format of repository faster than > written on C with snapshot based repository?
Because to for answer the questions did not you. -- .''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield : :' : http://www.debian.org/ | `. `' | `- -><- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ Gnu-arch-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-arch-users GNU arch home page: http://savannah.gnu.org/projects/gnu-arch/
