llvm dev - Jun 2016 - Switching to git (Windows experience) (was re:[cfe-dev] GitHub anyone?)

On 6/3/2016 9:31 AM, David Chisnall via llvm-dev wrote:
> On 3 Jun 2016, at 15:01, Aaron Ballman via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at
lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>> The end result is "go use the console". Whether that's
because people
>> recommend it or because it's the only option is immaterial. The
fact
>> remains, we don't have to do that today, we may have to do that
>> tomorrow, and some people view that as a regression. Let's not be
>> dismissive of that by claiming it's a personal preference, please.
> I don’t disagree, but the flip side of this argument is that git GUIs on
*NIX platforms (including OS X) are far better than their svn alternatives, in
part because things like committing individual parts of a set of changes
independently are standard parts of a git workflow (and, in a large part,
because the git CLI is a case study in poor UI design and so people have been
far more motivated to write GUIs than for svn).
>
> David
And they almost always leave out big chunks of functionality that are 
important for several use cases.  Basically, they figure out the 
commands needed for a small set of workflows, ensure the best case 
works, then stop there.

Coming from a perforce and SVN background, I think this is 
understandable.  With perforce and SVN, you just don't have as many 
options and possible workflows, so they tend to be a little easier to 
learn, and a lot easier to wrap in a UI on the client side.

-- 
Employee of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc.
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, a Linux
Foundation Collaborative Project

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20160603/efd65a4b/attachment.html>

On 3 June 2016 at 15:42, Craig, Ben via llvm-dev
<llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> Coming from a perforce and SVN background, I think this is understandable.
> With perforce and SVN, you just don't have as many options and possible
> workflows, so they tend to be a little easier to learn, and a lot easier to
> wrap in a UI on the client side.
So, we just have to make sure that we don't add any crazy workflow on Git.

That's why I like the idea of having llvm-projs as being an automated
sub-module hook-driven repo that no one uses, and let everyone else
use Git as it was intended, in a way that most GUIs can handle.

That's the workflow I'm looking for... I *really* don't want a
convoluted workflow "just because it's Git".

I'd rather use Git-SVN than have to write tons of bash scripts and
break my workflow. In that sense, we're on the exact same predicament.
GUI or not, makes no difference.

cheers,
--renato

My experience with git on windows over the last several years has been very
positive. I use TortoiseGIT for the bulk of my tasks. I like the fact that
I can perform most operations directly from the log window. I also use
git-gui (which is part of the base git installation) to do commits on
subsets of changes in a file, or a large number of separate commits in
quick succession. I find that I rarely need to use the command line as
tortoise git covers all the common commands, and a large number of the
uncommon ones. For LLVM I have used the unofficial, and now official git
mirrors for quite some time without issue (though I don't do very much with
it as I am not a regular contributor).

On Fri, Jun 3, 2016 at 7:50 AM Renato Golin via llvm-dev <
llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> On 3 June 2016 at 15:42, Craig, Ben via llvm-dev
> <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> > Coming from a perforce and SVN background, I think this is
> understandable.
> > With perforce and SVN, you just don't have as many options and
possible
> > workflows, so they tend to be a little easier to learn, and a lot
easier
> to
> > wrap in a UI on the client side.
>
> So, we just have to make sure that we don't add any crazy workflow on
Git.
>
> That's why I like the idea of having llvm-projs as being an automated
> sub-module hook-driven repo that no one uses, and let everyone else
> use Git as it was intended, in a way that most GUIs can handle.
>
> That's the workflow I'm looking for... I *really* don't want a
> convoluted workflow "just because it's Git".
>
> I'd rather use Git-SVN than have to write tons of bash scripts and
> break my workflow. In that sense, we're on the exact same predicament.
> GUI or not, makes no difference.
>
> cheers,
> --renato
> _______________________________________________
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
> http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20160603/90ba3aef/attachment.html>