Thanks Avi. These are some excellent reasons for MC2.

Cheers,
   - Andreas

Avi Bryant wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 13, 2008 at 7:56 PM, Andreas Raab <andreas.raab at gmx.de> wrote:
> 
>> I'd appreciate a five minutes sales pitch pointing out what one can do with
>> MC2. Either things one could not do or only barely do or maybe slowly do
>> with MC1. Anything to help me understand why I would want to use MC2 instead
>> of MC1 ;-)
> 
> The features I care the most about are these:
> 
> 1. Faster merges.  I have a couple of MC1 packages that are in the
> many thousands of versions.  When I merge, it takes over a minute
> before the dialog even pops up showing me the changes.  Making this
> less of a chore would be a great boon to my development workflow.
> 2. More efficient use of disk/network.  My MC repository is several
> gigabytes, and I frequently transfer megabytes to commit a couple of
> hundred bytes of source changes.  This isn't usually that big a
> problem, but when working on a laptop with a small harddrive or a slow
> connection, it's annoying.
> 3. Cherry picking.  The worst part about merging with MC is that it's
> all or nothing: you have to integrate every change someone has made,
> or none of them.  MC2 lets you pick a few changes now, a few changes
> later, and won't lose track of what you've done.
> 
> Others may have different priorities: for example, the fact that
> (IIRC) each instance variable (or class var, etc) is versioned
> separately, so that two people each adding an ivar to the same class
> won't conflict, might appeal, though it's not a problem I can remember
> ever running into.  MC2 was also written with portability much more in
> mind, though MC1 is portable in practice (it works with full interop
> on both Squeak and Gemstone), whereas MC2 is only portable in theory
> so far.  But the three listed above are the ones that will make a real
> impact on my daily work.
> 
> Avi
> 
>