6 ms·

Bzr is a huge and slow mess, I can't imagine why anyone would switch to it from git or hg.

• prog 17y ago
  Thats very informative. Thanks.
  • asenchi 17y ago
    Attempt to clone Emacs' repository (http://savannah.gnu.org/bzr/?group=emacs http://savannah.gnu.org/bzr/?group=emacs) sometime and you'll understand he's being very informative.
    • prog 17y ago
      Or I could stick to the launchpad mirror[1] which is extremely fast. savannah uses dumb http for bzr[2] and hence it is slow. I have been using the launchpad mirror for some time now. [1] https://launchpad.net/emacs https://launchpad.net/emacs [2] http://article.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel/121222 http://article.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel/121222
• ableal 17y ago
  Is it still slow in v2.0+ ? They quote 1.0 sec commits on the Firefox 3.5 repo test (vs. 1.1 for hg, 0.35 for git). ( cf. http://doc.bazaar.canonical.com/migration/en/why-switch-to-bazaar.html http://doc.bazaar.canonical.com/migration/en/why-switch-to-b... ) The http://whygitisbetterthanx.com/ http://whygitisbetterthanx.com/ site, sportingly linked to from the top of the page above, also has some comparative numbers (must click headers to show), but I don't see version numbers of the programs tested ...
• justrudd 17y ago
  I've had no problems with speed. How big of a repository are you working on? The largest I work on is about 70MB of source (code, html, images, documentation, etc.). I use a shared repository and branches take maybe a second or 2 to create.