Re: git mirror

[Riccardo Mottola]

Hi,

On 02/15/12 16:04, David Chisnall wrote:
> On 15 Feb 2012, at 13:06, Quentin Mathé wrote:
> There are two issues that I'd like to see a good solution for with this:
>
> The first is that we lose a monotonic counter for revisions.  If someone has a 
> bug, with svn you can say 'I think this is fixed in r12345, are you running an 
> older revision than this?' and they can actually answer it.  With git, you say 
> 'I think this is fixed in 4f13bc56' and they say 'well, I'm running 5196f8a' 
> and you say 'I have no idea what the relationship between the two is, one of us 
> needs to go and look at the timeline and see, and it's not going to be me 
> because you're the one with the problem' and they say 'fine, I don't care 
> either, your project sucks'.
I think this is a very good point which i hadn't thought before of and 
is a very good point for SVN. It helps also a lto when doing bisection 
search when doing bug searching (which is one thing where SVN is 
superior to CVS where you need to use dates for that, since revisions 
are only on files and messing around with date-stamps is boring).

Thus it confirms my idea of having a SVN master and a git slave is a 
potential good idea.

> The other issue is that git does not support partial checkouts.  This means 
> that we would have to split the GNUstep repository up into a load of sub 
> projects.  I don't see this as a major issue for things like Gorm, which are 
> largely independent, but I have in the past wanted to make changes to libobjc2 
> and base, or base and gui, or gui and back where the change in one layer 
> requires corresponding changes in another.  With svn, even though I have 
> checked all of these projects out separately, I can do an atomic commit to the 
> entire project so we never have an inconsistent state in the authoritative 
> repository - people either see the state before the commit or after.  With git 
> (and, I believe, all of the other DVCSs that have been suggested) this is not 
> possible, so someone can do a checkout of the core GNUstep modules and find 
> them in a non-building state.
Partial check-outs are quite convenient. Most developers will have the 
"whole" of devmodules. But for example, ewhen I work on Mac, I only have 
dev-libs checked out because I work on simplewebkit or webservices, I do 
not want nor need core.

Riccardo

---
This email is sent from My Computer. Not yours.