[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: conversion to git
From: |
Eric Blake |
Subject: |
Re: conversion to git |
Date: |
Wed, 19 Sep 2007 19:25:10 -0600 |
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.8.1.6) Gecko/20070728 Thunderbird/2.0.0.6 Mnenhy/0.7.5.666 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
According to Bob Friesenhahn on 9/19/2007 7:12 PM:
Hi Bob,
>>
>> The initial git import is complete. Feel free to check it out:
>>
>> http://git.savannah.gnu.org/gitweb/?p=autoconf.git
>
> What is the purpose of converting to git?
Primarily speed, but also security. In particular, Bruno found a rather
telling flaw in the CVS model of pushing all local files to the server,
and letting the server do all the work:
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-gnulib/2007-03/msg00474.html
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-cvs/2007-01/msg00018.html
Distributed version control systems (dvcs) do not have this flaw.
Personally, I enjoy the speed of browsing history on my own machine with
gitk rather than the slowness that is cvsweb. It makes archeological digs
through version control much faster.
Other benefits - git can trace file renames, and has a much more efficient
branching scheme than CVS. Which means simultaneous development on
unrelated topic branches is much easier to manage.
> Is this a political statement
> (e.g. "Linux GNU" vs "GNU Linux") or is there a concrete purpose? What
> is the cost vs benefit of the conversion? Who participated in the
> decision to make this conversion?
The gnulib list made the conversion first; it has been discussed there for
nearly half a year, and the group consensus was that git provided enough
benefits that it was worth switching, provided that read-only CVS access
was still possible. For example:
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/cgi-bin/namazu.cgi?query=conversion+git&submit=Search%21&idxname=bug-gnulib&max=20&result=normal&sort=score
A reasonable number of the autoconf maintainers follow the gnulib list.
And for those that don't, I stand by my promise to keep both the CVS and
git repositories in sync for a while longer, until we are sure that the
time has come to favor the git repository. I just hope it is faster than
the 6 months it took gnulib (although a lot of that delay was waiting for
git 1.5.3 to be released, as well as infrastructure improvements on
savannah to support git-based projects).
- --
Don't work too hard, make some time for fun as well!
Eric Blake address@hidden
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (Cygwin)
Comment: Public key at home.comcast.net/~ericblake/eblake.gpg
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFG8cv284KuGfSFAYARAmyEAJ9Xxo1FzMdth7EQdQv2f8Oq8TeHfgCg0twD
RQJpIBAk4KUGMT+Vm4o7/d0=
=G/nK
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
- conversion to git, Eric Blake, 2007/09/14
- Re: conversion to git, Andreas Schwab, 2007/09/14
- Re: conversion to git, Benoit SIGOURE, 2007/09/14
- Re: conversion to git, Eric Blake, 2007/09/19
- Re: conversion to git, Bob Friesenhahn, 2007/09/19
- Re: conversion to git,
Eric Blake <=
- Re: conversion to git, Bob Friesenhahn, 2007/09/19
- Re: conversion to git, Bob Proulx, 2007/09/19
- Re: conversion to git, Russ Allbery, 2007/09/19
- Re: conversion to git, Bob Friesenhahn, 2007/09/19
- Re: conversion to git, Russ Allbery, 2007/09/20
- Re: conversion to git, Paul Smith, 2007/09/20
- Re: conversion to git, Warren Young, 2007/09/20
- Re: conversion to git, Paul Smith, 2007/09/20
- Re: conversion to git, Ralf Corsepius, 2007/09/20
- Re: conversion to git, Russ Allbery, 2007/09/20