llvm dev - May 2016 - [cfe-dev] GitHub anyone?

> On May 31, 2016, at 1:42 PM, Matthias Braun <mbraun at apple.com>
wrote:
> 
>> 
>> On May 31, 2016, at 1:31 PM, Joerg Sonnenberger via llvm-dev
<llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>> 
>> On Tue, May 31, 2016 at 04:24:08PM -0400, Aaron Ballman via cfe-dev
wrote:
>>> On Tue, May 31, 2016 at 3:31 PM, Renato Golin via cfe-dev
>>> <cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>>>> Folks,
>>>> 
>>>> There has been some discussion on IRC about SVN hosting and the
perils
>>>> of doing it ourselves. The consensus on the current discussion
was
>>>> that moving to a Git-only solution would have some disvantages,
but
>>>> many advantages. Furthermore, not hosting our own repos would
save us
>>>> a lot of headaches, admin costs and timed out connections.
>>> 
>>> Not everyone thinks git is a step forward. Please do not force
people
>>> to use a "git-only" solution.
>> 
>> Amen.
>> 
>>>> 2. Due to SVN, we have a mandatory time sequence, so commits go
first
>>>> in LLVM, then Clang (for example), and buildbots don't get
lost. If we
>>>> use submodules [1], we can have a similar relationship, but in
a more
>>>> explicit way, and the problem could be solved elegantly.
>>> 
>>> I actually consider the monotonically increasing revisions to be a
>>> feature, but not sufficient to warrant a decision one way or the
>>> other.
>> 
>> Has the situation with git-submodules and bisect improved at all or is
>> bisecting clang+llvm going to be manual mess?
> I found bisecting with submodules (in another project) far superior to the
manual mess I have to do in clang+llvm today.
To be more exact here: I usually do not checkout llvm svn at a higher level
because that forces me back to svn (which last time I used it did not have
built-in support for bisection, not sure if that changed recently). So while I
have a consistent state in svn I spend the time manually calculating the next
commit to checkout. So what I do instead is using git for bisecting and having
some (brittle) scripts that sync multiple git repositories to use a commit from
the same time!

- Matthias

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20160531/401aa866/attachment.html>

On Tue, May 31, 2016 at 01:45:30PM -0700, Matthias Braun
wrote:
> To be more exact here: I usually do not checkout llvm svn at a higher
> level because that forces me back to svn (which last time I used it did
> not have built-in support for bisection, not sure if that changed
> recently).
svn-bisect is a trival tool and should be part of every good svn
installation. While I never got around to script the part of "update all
subrepos to the same revision", it certainly doesn't involve any
addition checks. From what I can tell, git submodules don't even support
that easily. I might be wrong though.

Joerg

> On May 31, 2016, at 2:05 PM, Joerg Sonnenberger via llvm-dev <llvm-dev
at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> 
> On Tue, May 31, 2016 at 01:45:30PM -0700, Matthias Braun wrote:
>> To be more exact here: I usually do not checkout llvm svn at a higher
>> level because that forces me back to svn (which last time I used it did
>> not have built-in support for bisection, not sure if that changed
>> recently).
> 
> svn-bisect is a trival tool and should be part of every good svn
> installation. While I never got around to script the part of "update
all
> subrepos to the same revision", it certainly doesn't involve any
> addition checks. From what I can tell, git submodules don't even
support
> that easily. I might be wrong though.
In a nutshell:
git-submodules basically records a git revision of your submodules with the
commits.
You can make such revision switches a natural part of commits.
"git submodule update [--recursive]" will bring your submodule
checkouts in sync with what the toplevel repository expects.

In any way we can have this discussion separate from the discussion of moving to
git. We can stay with our current ways of matching same date for now.

- Matthias