bzr's advantages over hg

[Masklinn]

On 2011-10-20, at 16:03 , Tom Anderson wrote:
> On 20 October 2011 14:29, Arne Babenhauserheide <arne_bab at web.de> wrote:
>> Am Donnerstag, 20. Oktober 2011, 15:14:19 schrieb Masklinn:
>>> On 2011-10-20, at 14:43 , Gour wrote:
>>> 
>>>> * Operates over SFTP, for ease of secure hosting in locations without
>>>> 
>>>>  specific Bazaar support.
>>> 
>>> Never been fond of "dumb" repositories, in my experience they're more of a
>>> problem than a solution. Plus setting up an hg repository is as simple as
>>> setting up a smart repo can be.
>>> 
>>> But OK.
>> 
>> I don’t see an advantage there: You can just upload a hg repo via FTP and get
>> it by HTTP. Example:
>> 
>> $ hg clone http://1w6.org/proj/technophob/
> 
> I don't know anything about how Mercurial handles the clone in that
> case. But if you upload by (S)FTP, you are transferring the entire
> repository. If you want to push some changes to an existing
> repository, you have to transfer the whole thing again.
> 
> I get the impression that Bazaar is able to pull and push over SFTP by
> just moving deltas (BICBW). This requires a repository layout that
> perhaps Mercurial does not have.
Yep, bazaar has a read/write story for "dumb servers" (FTP, SFTP and
WebDAV) [0]. In fact, this was originally the only way to access remotes
with bazaar, contributing to its (well-deserved, at the time)
reputation of being gruesomely slow.

[0] http://doc.bazaar.canonical.com/beta/en/admin-guide/other-setups.html