Jochen,

On Tue, 2008-07-01 at 14:40 +0200, Jochen Theodorou wrote:
> Russel Winder schrieb:
> [...]
> >> I placed Mercurial at 1, because it seems TortoiseBzr is no longer 
> >> developed, but TortoiseHg still is. There are basic plugins for all 
[ . . . ]
> > This statement about TortoiseBzr is not correct.
> 
> oh?
> 
> > Canonical spotted that
> > development was stalled and have engaged Mark Hammond to pick things up
> > and carry it to release, so there is paid help on the job now.  There is
> > a release early, release often programme in place.
> 
> but it seems there are still no committs

https://code.launchpad.net/~tortoisebzr-developers/tortoisebzr/tbzr2-proto

Looks active to me.

> > As will be pretty obvious from my previous emails, my preferred ordering
> > would be Bazaar, Mercurial, Subversion, Git.
> 
> I played a little with git... and was not very pleased about its 
> complexity... I had to spend over an hour to find out how to checkout a 
> certain release that is not head. I will try Bazaar and Mercurial soon

Reverting a file is the one that gets me thinking there is something
wrong with the command line structure.  Not to mention that the checkout
command is overloaded and sometimes changes branch and sometimes
doesn't.

[ . . . ]

> > Anyone can have a branch, that is the whole point of DVCS.  But there
> > will always be one that the community accept as being the official state
> > of software.
> 
> well, yes, sure... ut where are these branches physically? I more or 
> less came to this problem when hearing the google talk from Linus to 
> advocate GIT. He is pulling from others.. If I understand this right, 
> then there is some kind of remote repository and he is getting the 
> actual version from it. If not, then it would be a simple patch send by 
> for example email, or not? Bazaar seems not to work like this... at 
> least with the tools from above. It seems that then you have the patches 
> send to the mailing list and an automated tool will merge them. So there 
> is no need to access a remote repository. Am I worng about this?

Branches can be anywhere.  Usually though they are accessible either
over SSH or HTTP(S).  So for strictly controlled access branches you use
the SSH access, HTTP gives public read-only access, and HTTPS+WebvDAV
gives you controlled writeable access.

Launchpad (for Bazaar), GitHub (for Git), Savannah (Bazaar, Mercurial or
Git) all provide branch/repository hosting.  Hopefully soon so will
Codehaus.

Doing things with email and patch queues is another way instead of
accessing .
-- 
Russel.
====================================================
Dr Russel Winder                 Partner

Concertant LLP                   t: +44 20 7585 2200, +44 20 7193 9203
41 Buckmaster Road,              f: +44 8700 516 084
London SW11 1EN, UK.             m: +44 7770 465 077