Subject: Re: VCS comparison table

From: Jakub Narebski <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2006 15:53:23 +0200

Aaron Bentley wrote:

> Andreas Ericsson wrote:

>> The only issue I have with bzr's revno's and truly distributed setup is
>> that, by looking at the table, it seems to claim that you have found
>> some miraculous way to make revnos work without a central server. Since
>> everyone agrees that they don't, this should IMO be listed as mutually
>> exclusive features.
> 
> The "simple namespace" is both a URL and a revno.
> 
> And therefore, it's just as distributed and decentralized as the web.
> 
> There is very little difference between this:
> 
> http://example.com/mywebpage#5
> 
> And this:
> 
> http://example.com/mybranch 5
> 
> In fact, we've been planning to unify them into one identifier.

Well, then it is not much simpler than 8-chars sha1. And sha1 is more
decentralized, because you can use it when you don't have access to net,
and when the _central_ revno server is down.
-- 
Jakub Narebski
Warsaw, Poland
ShadeHawk on #git