llvm dev - Nov 2012 - [LLVMdev] Poll Results: Do you prefer Git or SVN for LLVM development?

Thank you everyone for your participation.

A few flaws in my poll:

1) Favoring Git: Subversion supporters are more likely to be split
between the last two options.
2) Favoring SVN: Timing of the poll went from Friday night to Monday
morning, which probably favored the open source community to 9-to-5ers
on private forks.
3) Favoring radicals: Too easy to cheat. Requiring a login or email
address would have been better, but may have discouraged
participation.

Although accuracy is poor, the split is wide enough that demonstrate
Git has wide support and that SVN's support is still significant.  At
noon PST on Monday morning, we are at 70 supporting Git-only, 12
supporting SVN-only, and 12 supporting both.  Or Git-only vs the rest
at 70-to-24, roughly 3-to-1.  I think this suggests either that the
community is abandoning the incumbent VCS, or that there are a number
of private forks with a vested interested in switching to a DVCS.
What I find most interesting is that Git support is so high despite
the GettingStarted page encouraging the use of SVN and referring to
Git as just a mirror.

-Greg


On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 9:52 AM,  <dag at cray.com>
wrote:
> Greg Fitzgerald <garious at gmail.com> writes:
>
>> I'm curious to know if the LLVM community is deeply split when it
>> comes to version control.  If you have a second, could you please
>> vote?
>>
>> http://poll.pollcode.com/i597kq
>
> Thanks Greg.
>
> The last option is vague.  I do like that we have both but would prefer
> git as the canonical source.  So I just picked "git only" even
though
> that's not really my preference.
>
>                             -David

On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 12:12 PM, Greg Fitzgerald <garious at gmail.com>
wrote:
> Thank you everyone for your participation.
>
> A few flaws in my poll:
Also: sample bias.

You asked for responses in an email thread talking about git on an
essentially wide-open mailing list. I don't think that any conclusions
about the actual development community of LLVM can be drawn from such
a poll.

> You asked for responses in an email thread talking about git
Are you referring to the first email of the thread with the same
subject line as this one, minus the word 'Results'?

> I don't think that any conclusions about the actual
> development community of LLVM can be drawn
> from such a poll.
Correct, the poll does not represent the "actual development community
of LLVM."  It is a sample of those with an active interest in LLVM.
Take from it what you will...


http://poll.pollcode.com/i597kq_result

-Greg

On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 12:53 PM, Chandler Carruth <chandlerc at
google.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 12:12 PM, Greg Fitzgerald <garious at
gmail.com> wrote:
>> Thank you everyone for your participation.
>>
>> A few flaws in my poll:
>
> Also: sample bias.
>
> You asked for responses in an email thread talking about git on an
> essentially wide-open mailing list. I don't think that any conclusions
> about the actual development community of LLVM can be drawn from such
> a poll.

Le 19 nov. 2012 à 21:12, Greg Fitzgerald <garious at gmail.com> a écrit :
> Thank you everyone for your participation.
> 
> A few flaws in my poll:
> 
> 1) Favoring Git: Subversion supporters are more likely to be split
> between the last two options.
> 2) Favoring SVN: Timing of the poll went from Friday night to Monday
> morning, which probably favored the open source community to 9-to-5ers
> on private forks.
> 3) Favoring radicals: Too easy to cheat. Requiring a login or email
> address would have been better, but may have discouraged
> participation.
> 
> Although accuracy is poor, the split is wide enough that demonstrate
> Git has wide support and that SVN's support is still significant.  At
> noon PST on Monday morning, we are at 70 supporting Git-only, 12
> supporting SVN-only, and 12 supporting both.  Or Git-only vs the rest
> at 70-to-24, roughly 3-to-1.  I think this suggests either that the
> community is abandoning the incumbent VCS, or that there are a number
> of private forks with a vested interested in switching to a DVCS.
> What I find most interesting is that Git support is so high despite
> the GettingStarted page encouraging the use of SVN and referring to
> Git as just a mirror.
The getting start page has nothing to do with this result IMHO.
Some people may have said they prefer git while they are not even aware that a
LLVM git mirror exists,
but just speaking about their personal experience with VCS systems.
> -Greg
> 
> 
> On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 9:52 AM,  <dag at cray.com> wrote:
>> Greg Fitzgerald <garious at gmail.com> writes:
>> 
>>> I'm curious to know if the LLVM community is deeply split when
it
>>> comes to version control.  If you have a second, could you please
>>> vote?
>>> 
>>> http://poll.pollcode.com/i597kq
>> 
>> Thanks Greg.
>> 
>> The last option is vague.  I do like that we have both but would prefer
>> git as the canonical source.  So I just picked "git only"
even though
>> that's not really my preference.
>> 
>>                            -David
> _______________________________________________
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu         http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu
> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev
-- Jean-Daniel