On Tue, Jul 1, 2008 at 12:02 PM, NextGen$ <nextgens at freenetproject.org> wrote: > * David ???Bombe??? Roden <bombe at pterodactylus.net> [2008-06-30 00:31:03]: > >> Hey folks, >> >> I have been looking at and working with Git for the last four or five weeks >> and I must say that I???m very impressed by it. It???s easy to use, > > We must have different definitions of the word "easy" :) > >> it???s extremely powerful, > > granted > >> it enables developers to perform the most tedious tasks >> in a very short time and in general simply wipes the floor with >> subversion. :) >> > > Here I don't agree; they are targetting a different audience, hence they > provide a different set of functionnalities... and have different problems. > >> It is possible to import subversion repositories into Git, keeping the >> complete history and even branches, and it???s even possible to commit >> changes >> made in a local repository back to subversion; I just tested that tonight >> when I fixed nextgens??? backport of toad???s BucketChainBucket???it even >> made >> finding the bug simple. >> > > We all agree that that merging things from branches back and forth is not > easy with svn 1.4... but it will be easier when we will upgrade to a > merge-tracking enabled version. > >> Git repositories can be served by a special git-daemon or by a normal, >> run-off-the-mill HTTP server without any special modules. No DAV, no CGI, no >> nothing, just plain HTTP. >> >> I???d suggest that we move to Git rather sooner than later; > > What feature does it have we would *need* ? > Since 0.7 started we had something like 6 branches... Even though I agree > that the merging tool is under-optimized, I think we can live with it. > > First of all I am not convinced that we want to use a DSCM... and as for > the choice of GIT, well, I don't think it's appropriate in our usecase > for the following reasons: > - Its user interface sucks (even the git guys acknowledge that and > that's why they developped many front-ends to git like cogito)
That's many years ago. The cogito project have ended, and some of the feature have been merged to the mainline. Lots of the frontend and documentation have been rewritten dueing the process. > - Its documentation is inexistent Same as above. > - Its integration to IDEs sucks > - Its not cross-platform, contrary to SVN It is cross-platform. It work well on mingw32 and cygwin. > - As far as I know it's not possible to integrate it with mantis, nor > to auto-link svn revision numbers filled into tickets to commit > identifiers git uses. This is a general problem for DSCM. > - It's a DSCM ... DSCMs concepts are more complicated to apprehend > than SCMs concepts for the average guy; We try to lower the fence > the average contributor has to pass in order to be able to > contribute; not to higher it. average contributor just send in small, self contained patch. > - DSCMs encourage forking; that's definitly not something we want to > do. for anonymous development, we *need* private branch and forking. > To be fair, on the assets side we have: > - makes anonymous development easier (but we didn't have many anon. > contributors... and I doubt it's related to the tools) If we want to encourage anonymous contribution, a DSCM is preferred.. This allow the contributor keep a private branch while waiting for review / merge. I know we don't want to accept anonymous contribution now (for legal reason), but we have to do this sooner or later due to the nature of freenet. (development of freenet *will* be outlawed in most country in a few years..) > - Working copies are smaller as they aren't per-branch. > - It's probably faster than SVN when you work locally and don't push > your changes. > >> most of the trouble >> we had with bug #2440 (which resulted from the faulty backport) would never >> have occured in the first place with Git. (Sure, of course you can make >> changes in the wrong branch but Git will happily apply a commit from one >> branch to another so the backport could have been done in two minutes.) >> > > Well, I was aware it was broken but didn't take the time to fix it before I > left... > >> Anybody in favor? Anybody opposed? >> > > I'm opposed but I guess you already know it if you read that email up to > here :) How about Mercurial? Will you support migrating to it? It have much better IDE support and cross platform support. (while keeping the other "disadvantages") Plus, there are three different freenet+hg integrations. We need a DSCM that work over freenet before it is outlawed in most country. (I prefer git) --
