Moving Away From CVS: A Vote

Gervase Markham gerv at
Mon Sep 7 09:54:58 UTC 2009

Current vote: undecided.

On 04/09/09 23:28, Max Kanat-Alexander wrote:
> If you doubt that bzr is technically superior, here are a few points:
> * Compare the standard web interface to Hg (hgweb:
> ) to the standard web interface for bzr
> (loggerhead: ).

Here's a test for function I've needed from the 3 major Mozilla SCMs 
recently: can it give me an XML or RSS feed of all changes in the entire 
repository (or, perhaps, a separate feed for each branch) from a 
particular date, say, six months ago?

> * bzr has a *major* release nearly every month. (See the release notes:
> )
> Mercurial's major releases are roughly 3 to 4 months apart (and there
> were 9 months from 1.0 to 1.1).

I really don't think release frequency is a good metric of software quality.

> However, Hg is supported by the Mozilla Corporation and they already
> have extensive infrastructure around it.

I personally use an abstraction library (Patch Maker - to work with multiple SCMs, 
so in one sense it doesn't matter too much. And I've certainly found Hg 
difficult to use. But my one big concern would be the level of support 
we would get from Mozilla IT if we asked them to support Yet Another SCM 
system. If justdave is telling us he can guarantee that Mozilla IT will 
properly support bzr, then I'll abstain. Otherwise, I vote for Hg.

dev-apps-bugzilla mailing list
dev-apps-bugzilla at

More information about the developers mailing list