Fossil vs Git

#1

Post by afiori » Sat, Jan 26, 2019, 12:37 PM UTC

Re: Fossil vs Git

#2

Post by fxfan » Sat, Jan 26, 2019, 1:53 PM UTC

I'm surprised git caught on despite mercurial being much superior (hadn't heard of fossil before). Git has the following shortcomings which are major (some shared by other VCS too)

1) UI- terrible, terrible UI

2) Unncessarily complex data model

3) Doesn't scale well to large repos (until Microsoft's VFS- windows only)

(and many others...)

Re: Fossil vs Git

#3

Post by rco8786 » Sat, Jan 26, 2019, 2:01 PM UTC

fxfan wrote: post #2

I'm surprised git caught on despite mercurial being much superior (hadn't heard of fossil before). Git has the following shortcomings which are major (some shared by other VCS too) 1) UI- terrible, terrible UI 2) Unncessarily complex data model 3) Doesn't scale well to large repos (until Microsoft's VFS- windows only) (and many others...)

> Unncessarily complex data model

The git data model is certainly complex, but I'd be curious to hear why you think it's 'unnecessarily' so. I often try and drum up a new SCM in my head and the data model gets pretty complex every time.

Re: Fossil vs Git

#4

Post by sigzero » Sat, Jan 26, 2019, 2:04 PM UTC

fxfan wrote: post #2

I'm surprised git caught on despite mercurial being much superior (hadn't heard of fossil before). Git has the following shortcomings which are major (some shared by other VCS too) 1) UI- terrible, terrible UI 2) Unncessarily complex data model 3) Doesn't scale well to large repos (until Microsoft's VFS- windows only) (and many others...)

Fossil is made by the same gentleman (D. Richard Hipp) that gave us SQLite.

Re: Fossil vs Git

#5

Post by echofavor » Sat, Jan 26, 2019, 2:15 PM UTC

Thanks for sharing. You can also share your ideas for free on www.echofavor.com

Re: Fossil vs Git

#6

Post by deepaksurti » Sat, Jan 26, 2019, 2:15 PM UTC

The Fossil Logo [1] resembles so much the Lisp Lizard! [2]

[1] https://fossil-scm.org/fossil/doc/trunk/www/index.wiki

[2] http://xahlee.info/UnixResource_dir/writ/logo_lisp.html

Re: Fossil vs Git

#7

Post by ethelward » Sat, Jan 26, 2019, 2:19 PM UTC

fxfan wrote: post #2

I'm surprised git caught on despite mercurial being much superior (hadn't heard of fossil before). Git has the following shortcomings which are major (some shared by other VCS too) 1) UI- terrible, terrible UI 2) Unncessarily complex data model 3) Doesn't scale well to large repos (until Microsoft's VFS- windows only) (and many others...)

To give a personal, subjective point of view of why I switched from hg to git:

  - hg was horribly slow compared to git;
  - I love the branchs model used in git to let several persons work on different parts of the same project, and I could never find a satisfactory equivalent using hg idiomatisms.

It is true that hg has a far better UI in general, but Magit fixes this problem for me.

Re: Fossil vs Git

#8

Post by Chyzwar » Sat, Jan 26, 2019, 2:21 PM UTC

fxfan wrote: post #2

I'm surprised git caught on despite mercurial being much superior (hadn't heard of fossil before). Git has the following shortcomings which are major (some shared by other VCS too) 1) UI- terrible, terrible UI 2) Unncessarily complex data model 3) Doesn't scale well to large repos (until Microsoft's VFS- windows only) (and many others...)

1) It is not beginners friendly but for day to day dev you only need to understand few commands.

2) Data model brings speed that was not possible before. git won VCS space because of sheer performance.

3) Scale just fine. Just windows have a really bad filesystem and Windows codebase is the pathologic case.

Re: Fossil vs Git

#9

Post by anilakar » Sat, Jan 26, 2019, 2:26 PM UTC

Funny how they say that Git uses a "Bazaar-style development" process when Bazaar literally is another VCS.

I'm also not convinced it's a good idea to merge your bug tracker and version control.

Re: Fossil vs Git

#10

Post by fxfan » Sat, Jan 26, 2019, 2:26 PM UTC

Chyzwar wrote: post #8

fxfan wrote: post #2

I'm surprised git caught on despite mercurial being much superior (hadn't heard of fossil before). Git has the following shortcomings which are major (some shared by other VCS too) 1) UI- terrible, terrible UI 2) Unncessarily complex data model 3) Doesn't scale well to large repos (until Microsoft's VFS- windows only) (and many others...)

1) It is not beginners friendly but for day to day dev you only need to understand few commands. 2) Data model brings speed that was not possible before. git won VCS space because of sheer performance. 3) Scale just fine. Just windows have a really bad filesystem and Windows codebase is the pathologic case.

I am not a beginner and not trying to boast but pretty smart and experienced.

The problem is that the edge cases that come up have solutions which need to be looked up- not derived from understanding. And when you're scared of data loss, its a very frustrating situation