At Thu, 3 Feb 2011 08:31:33 -0500, Ronald Garcia wrote:
On Feb 2, 2011, at 8:07 PM, David Bergman wrote:
On Feb 2, 2011, at 5:57 PM, Dave Abrahams wrote:
[snip]
Part of this also has to do with what systems people are willing to invest in supporting. Several of us at least are enthusiastic about moving to Git. I wouldn't be so interested in working on it if it were going to be something else. I also have a personal opinion that Git is winning the DVCS war-of-popularity, FWIW.
My opinion is that Git is winning the VCS war-of-popularity - might take two years, though.
Yes, Git is (obviously?) a much better alternative for Boost than is Bazaar or Mercurial (or Darcs...)
For those of us who haven't been following the DVCS revolution closely, this isn't obvious. I look forward to seeing some more information on the wiki page (or perhaps links to messages that have passed by in this forum?) about how these different systems' features/designs relate to Boost's development process.
This conversation (except for any parts that may be boost-specific---but Boost isn't really that unique in any way that matters to the issue) has been had and re-had in many other fora. Like all such discussions, it has a tendency to inspire fla^H^H^Hunproductive interactions. Furthermore, it's my personal experience (FWIW) that the only way to really understand these tools and especially the user experiences they confer is to work with them. I don't think you can learn very much as a spectator, in this case. So to anyone who cares about this issue, and wants to catch up, I suggest you do the research yourself. -- Dave Abrahams BoostPro Computing http://www.boostpro.com