FlyLanguage <flylanguage at gmail.com> writes:>> Have we made any progress on a potential git conversion? AFAIK the only >> outstanding technical issue is the monotonic revision number question. >> Personally, I have no nead for them but others have expressed >> reservation about losing them. > > There are very decent solutions to the monotonic revnum issue (git > describe, hooks/tagging), so that shouldn't hold back the transition.That's what we need to have a discussion about. If those things will work for people, great. If not, we have some stuff to figure out.> I suppose it's merely a manpower thing nowI'm not assuming that given the volume of e-mail around this.> and the fact that Subversion unfortunately works "well enough" for the > majority of peeps.Is that really true? I've heard of a lot of LLVM developers using git but it all seems very opaque right now. That's why I hope to get people talking so we can find out where everyone is and go from there. -Dave
> That's what we need to have a discussion about. If those things will > work for people, great. If not, we have some stuff to figure out.Agreed. Hopefully core peeps will chime in.>> I suppose it's merely a manpower thing now > > I'm not assuming that given the volume of e-mail around this.Sending mail is cheap. Switching to git completely isn't.>> and the fact that Subversion unfortunately works "well enough" for the >> majority of peeps. > > Is that really true? I've heard of a lot of LLVM developers using git > but it all seems very opaque right now. That's why I hope to get people > talking so we can find out where everyone is and go from there.Yet, there's surprisingly little complaint about Subversion around here, which is kinda unfortunate :)
On Sep 1, 2011, at 3:15 PM, FlyLanguage wrote:>> Is that really true? I've heard of a lot of LLVM developers using git >> but it all seems very opaque right now. That's why I hope to get people >> talking so we can find out where everyone is and go from there. > > Yet, there's surprisingly little complaint about Subversion around here, > which is kinda unfortunate :)I know you're being facetious, but why is it unfortunate? SVN serves our workflow very well. The versioning system should get out of the way of development; it shouldn't "pull focus." SVN doesn't require you to spend a lot of time learning it and adapting to its way of doing things. (The learning curve for SVN was small for me. My initial (and subsequent) experiences with git are that it's very, very complex. And it gets in the way of most things I want to do. I still don't know what a "ref" or "object" is.) -bw