From: Peter Krefting <peter@softwolves.pp.se>
To: Git Mailing List <git@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Git/Mercurial interoperability (and what about bzr?) (was: Re: [VOTE] git versus mercurial)
Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2008 15:41:29 +0100 (CET) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0810281536360.27029@ds9.cixit.se> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.1.00.0810281445190.22125@pacific.mpi-cbg.de.mpi-cbg.de>
Johannes Schindelin:
> While many may say that that is a half-baked solution, I actually
> like it. Mercurial and Git are pretty similar in their concept (if
> not in how the data is actually stored).
That touches on something that I have been thinking about for a while.
How difficult are the storage formats? Would it be possible, in a
reasonable amount of work, to add support for the Mercurial protocol
and format in "git clone", so that I could clone a Mercurial repository
and work on it with Git, and then possibly use "git push" to possibly
push the result back to Mercurial?
It seems to me that use of DVCS is polarising between Git, Mercurial
and Bzr. It would be nice to have easy interoperability between the
systems, at least as far as can be covered by the lowest common
denominator of what they support. I would love to be able to use Git to
clone a Bzr repository that I need to be able to access, since bzr is
just different enough from Git to be annoying. Same goes for Mercurial.
And I am sure that users of the other tools feel the same.
Would it be possible to design a common transfer format that could be
implemented by all three (and that would be a little smarter than
fast-export/fast-import)?
--
\\// Peter - http://www.softwolves.pp.se/
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-10-28 14:42 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 65+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-10-26 4:28 [VOTE] git versus mercurial walt
2008-10-26 14:15 ` [VOTE] git versus mercurial (for DragonflyBSD) Jakub Narebski
2008-10-26 14:30 ` Maxim Vuets
2008-10-26 15:05 ` Leo Razoumov
2008-10-26 18:55 ` Jakub Narebski
2008-10-27 0:20 ` Arne Babenhauserheide
2008-10-27 4:15 ` Leo Razoumov
2008-10-27 7:16 ` Arne Babenhauserheide
2008-10-27 7:16 ` dhruva
2008-10-27 0:47 ` Arne Babenhauserheide
2008-10-27 1:52 ` Jakub Narebski
2008-10-27 7:50 ` Arne Babenhauserheide
2008-10-27 9:41 ` Jakub Narebski
2008-10-27 10:12 ` Leslie P. Polzer
2008-10-27 10:14 ` Arne Babenhauserheide
2008-10-27 12:48 ` Jakub Narebski
[not found] ` <200810271512.26352.arne_bab@web.de>
2008-10-27 18:01 ` Jakub Narebski
2008-10-27 20:48 ` Arne Babenhauserheide
2008-10-27 21:07 ` Miklos Vajna
2008-10-27 21:30 ` Arne Babenhauserheide
2008-10-28 0:13 ` Miklos Vajna
2008-10-28 17:48 ` Andreas Ericsson
2008-10-28 19:11 ` Arne Babenhauserheide
2008-10-28 19:38 ` SZEDER Gábor
2008-11-06 16:25 ` Marcin Kasperski
2008-11-06 17:41 ` Isaac Jurado
2008-10-28 19:16 ` Randal L. Schwartz
2008-10-27 23:25 ` Jakub Narebski
2008-10-27 9:29 ` Benoit Boissinot
2008-10-27 10:57 ` Jakub Narebski
2008-10-27 14:29 ` 0000 vk
2008-10-27 14:57 ` Jakub Narebski
[not found] ` <1225100597.31813.11.camel@abelardo.lan>
2008-10-27 11:42 ` David Soria Parra
2008-10-27 20:07 ` Brandon Casey
2008-10-27 20:37 ` Jakub Narebski
2008-10-28 1:28 ` Nicolas Pitre
2008-10-26 15:57 ` Felipe Contreras
2008-10-26 19:07 ` Jakub Narebski
2008-10-26 19:54 ` Felipe Contreras
2008-10-28 12:31 ` [VOTE] git versus mercurial walt
2008-10-28 14:28 ` Johannes Schindelin
2008-10-28 14:41 ` Peter Krefting [this message]
2008-10-28 14:59 ` Git/Mercurial interoperability (and what about bzr?) (was: Re: [VOTE] git versus mercurial) Johannes Schindelin
2008-10-28 15:02 ` Git/Mercurial interoperability (and what about bzr?) Matthieu Moy
2008-10-28 15:03 ` Git/Mercurial interoperability (and what about bzr?) (was: Re: [VOTE] git versus mercurial) Nicolas Pitre
2008-10-28 15:33 ` Pieter de Bie
2008-10-28 19:12 ` Miklos Vajna
2008-10-28 21:10 ` Miklos Vajna
2008-10-28 21:31 ` Theodore Tso
2008-10-28 23:28 ` Miklos Vajna
2008-11-01 8:06 ` Git/Mercurial interoperability (and what about bzr?) Florian Weimer
2008-11-01 10:03 ` Santi Béjar
2008-11-01 10:33 ` Jakub Narebski
2008-11-01 10:44 ` Florian Weimer
2008-11-01 11:10 ` Florian Weimer
2008-11-01 12:26 ` Jakub Narebski
2008-11-01 13:39 ` Theodore Tso
2008-11-01 17:51 ` Linus Torvalds
2008-11-02 1:13 ` Theodore Tso
2008-11-01 10:16 ` Git/Mercurial interoperability (and what about bzr?) (was: Re: [VOTE] git versus mercurial) Peter Krefting
2008-10-29 19:11 ` [VOTE] git versus mercurial Shawn O. Pearce
2008-10-29 19:36 ` Boyd Lynn Gerber
2008-10-29 19:48 ` Johannes Schindelin
2008-10-29 19:51 ` Boyd Lynn Gerber
2008-10-29 8:15 ` Miles Bader
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=Pine.LNX.4.64.0810281536360.27029@ds9.cixit.se \
--to=peter@softwolves.pp.se \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).