On 4/8/06, Bryan O'Sullivan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi, Holger - > > Thanks for raising your concerns. I have some responses below. > > > - Interoperability: Is there a compatibility layer or > > bridge to make > > the Mercurial repository available to CVS or > > Subversion clients? > > Yes. Lele Gaifax has written a tool called tailor that allows bridging > between CVS, Subversion and Mercurial.
Is this bridge one way or does it work in both directions? What are the plans for the main repository - will it be based on Mercurial or Subversion? > > If I recall it correctly Mercurial required Python(!!) > > which is a portability NIGHTMARE. > > I'm sure you must have many specifics in mind; would you like to share them? > I think that would be very helpful in keeping the discussion grounded in > concrete terms. The specifics are various API changed which broke python applications in the past which made me a very unhappy python user (good examples are the i18n changes which broke mailman several times in the past, hitting even big sites such as freedesktop.org and sourceforge). The problem I see that even a minor change in the python run time can cause subtle errors which remain unnoticed for a longer time (the python issue at sourceforge caused a gaping security hole which was exploited within less than a day, making this concern even a security issue). My question at this point is: Does Mercurial provide any test suite and internal consistency checking mechanism to prevent data corruption or spoofing? Will Sun provide precompiled and TESTED python and Mercurial packages? Will be there a security audit at Suns side of the python run time and Mercurial code? For comparison: The Subversion code was already audited by several parties including the German "Bundesamt für Sicherheit in der Informationstechnik" and certified for usage in sensitive areas within the government. "Mercurial" was mentioned nowhere in their internal lists - either "Mercurial" is something brand new or it fell through for other reasons. The latter option worries me (again this may be unjustified - it is just a feeling). > > - Availability: Neither Suse Linux or any BSD > > variants (FreeBSD, > > OpenBSD, NetBSD) provide Mercurial packages as part > > of their > > distributions. > > I'm afraid that none of these claims is actually true. Here are some pointers > I found with a few simple Google searches just a moment ago: > > Here is the NetBSD port (Google for "netbsd mercurial"): > http://pkgsrc.se/devel/mercurial > The FreeBSD port (Google for "freebsd mercurial ports"): > http://www.freshports.org/devel/mercurial/ These packages are not on the official distribution CDs. There are ports which compile but there is no guarantee whether they really work. > The SUSE package (Google for "suse mercurial"): > http://www.novell.com/products/linuxpackages/professional/mercurial.html Again, yast does not list a package "mercurial" in Suse 9.1 and 9.2. It is available as optional package for download but it is not part of the official DVD (your link above indicates that it was added for 10.0 which may be a good thing (TM)). -- Holger _______________________________________________ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
