On Fri, Jun 15, 2007 at 03:59:24PM +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote:
quoted text
> I haven't tried quilt either but, if it uses plain text patches, the
> disadvantage might be the losing of the three-way merge when pushing a
> patch onto the stack. The solution is to remember which commit the
> patch applies to, switch the tree, apply the patch and merge with
> HEAD.

Note that I haven't tried guilt either.

However, storing diffs is certainly a great way to interact with
legacy SCMs, and there are situations where guilt is certainly more
suited than stgit.  Eg, on a project where you have to use CVS, and
you have to maintain changes to a Linux kernel, and you want to store
the history of a series of patches, guilt will be much easier to use
than stgit.

We may even want to implement something in stgit to ease such
integration with legacy SCMs - eg. an option to auto-export the stack
on push/refresh should not be too hard to implement.


quoted text
> StGIT might have some more features as it is older but I see a lot of
> development is going on with guilt. Another difference is that StGIT
> is written in Python and guilt uses shell scripts (some people don't
> like the dependency on Python).

Well, people may not like python, but IMHO it is a lot easier to learn
it if you don't know it (that's what I did, although I did not start
from zero), than writing a robust and maintainable software of even
moderate complexity in shell script.  Shell script may be good for
prototyping or gluing tools in a simple way, but for advanced sofware
on which to rely to store my own data, it is just not really suited.

Best regards,
-- 
Yann
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html