On 11/18/12 01:31, Konstantin Belousov wrote:
On Sat, Nov 17, 2012 at 11:05:40PM -0800, Perry Hutchison wrote:
[trimmed some of the lists]
Chris Rees <utis...@gmail.com> wrote:
... git doesn't work with our workflow.
I'm sure the workflow itself is documented somewhere, but is
there a good writeup of _how_ git doesn't work with it, e.g. what
capabilit{y,ies} is/are missing? Seems this might be of interest
to the git developers, not because they necessarily want to support
FreeBSD as such, but as an example of a real-world workflow that git
currently does not handle well.
Git would work well with our workflow. It supports the centralized
repository model, which the project employs right now.
The biggest issues, assuming the project indeed decides to move to Git
right now, are the migration costs, both in the term of the technical
efforts needed, and the learning curve for the most population of the
committers.
Relatively minor problem, at least with the current rate of the commits,
would be a commit race, when the shared repo head forwarded due to the
parallel commit. The issue should be somewhat mitigated by the Git
allowance to push a set of changes in one push.
git would be a huge step backward from svn for the central repo in lots
of ways. Besides being (in my experience) extremely fragile and
error-prone and the issues of workflow that have been brought up, the
loss of monotonic revision numbers is a really major problem. Switching
SCMs as a result of a security problem is also an action totally
disproportionate with the issue that should not be made in a panic.
Having more [cryptographic] verifiability in the release process is a
good thing; it is not strictly related to the choice of version control
system.
-Nathan
_______________________________________________
freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
