GNU bug report logs - #7053
reftex and up-list

Previous Next

Full log

View this message in rfc822 format

From: Alpár Jüttner <alpar <at> cs.elte.hu>
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
Cc: auctex-devel <at> gnu.org, 7053 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, dominik <at> science.uva.nl
Subject: bug#7053: Reftex is fully broken
Date: Sun, 19 Sep 2010 08:42:18 +0200

> > I try to avoid to do it as far as I can. I'm a big fan of distributed
> > version control systems. I use hg in several project with grate success
> > and satisfaction. I people have also very good experience with git.
> > 
> > But bzr is so much pain to use. A 'bzr pull' triggers tens of MB net
> > traffic  every time (and takes long minutes), operations that are
> > instantaneous on hg/git takes ages here (log, update, status, diff).
> 
> If you have a bzr repository on your machine, then "bzr bisect" is a
> local operation that doesn't involve any network traffic or
> negotiation with the remote repository. 

I know that. I meant I try to use bzr for nothing else that is absolute
necessary to get the latest dev version.

>  So there's no reason not to
> use "bzr bisect".

I feel there are many good reasons not to use bzr at all. There are much
better alternatives.

But it is very off topic here, so please forget about my enthusiastic
expression of my dissatisfaction with bzr. Sorry for the noise.

Regards,
Alpar

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.