undefined | Better HN

0 pointsgecko15y ago0 comments

I'm actually far more interested in Fossil since it became BSD-licensed, but it's not nearly as widely used as the other three. The biggest projects I know of that use Fossil are SQLite, Lamson, Librelist, and Fossil (natch). Git's major projects are things like the Linux kernel, X, and Rails; Mercurial's include Firefox, OpenJDK, and Xen; and Bazaar's users include Emacs and MySQL. All three of those also have large commercial hosting options that are pretty heavily used (e.g., GitHub, Gitorious, Google Code, Bitbucket, Kiln, Launchpad), whereas Fossil currently lacks anything similar.

I'm not saying Fossil is bad for not being widely used; just that it's definitely not yet as popular as Git, Hg, and Bzr.

0 comments

3 comments · 2 top-level

tzs15y ago· 1 in thread

Emacs is de jure using Bazaar, but is it using it de facto? I read somewhere (I think it was here on HN) that the Emacs developers were leaning toward Git, but RMS decided on Bazaar because that's the office GNU DVCS. The comment or article I read said that someone made a good Bazaar/Git bridge, and most of the active Emacs developers are actually using Git, and bridging to Bazaar when they want to push to or pull from the official repository.

avar15y ago

That's true to a large extent as far as I can tell. I've seen reports on emacs-devel of commits taking a couple of minutes, and of having merge issues you'd never encounter in Git.

Bazaar wasn't chosen for Emacs for technical reasons, and they appear to be suffering the consequences of that.

bch15y ago

No question it's not as popular. A few folks (myself included) are working on using it for the NetBSD src, though, fwiw. IF we get that up/running and blessed (by NetBSD, who are on search for CVS alternatives), it'd a nice feather in the hat for fossil.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse