From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([69.77.167.62] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1Kmc7y-0006g9-VO for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sun, 05 Oct 2008 22:31:04 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 3615FE0511; Sun, 5 Oct 2008 22:31:03 +0000 (UTC) Received: from wr-out-0506.google.com (wr-out-0506.google.com [64.233.184.234]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 18751E0511 for ; Sun, 5 Oct 2008 22:31:03 +0000 (UTC) Received: by wr-out-0506.google.com with SMTP id c37so1161241wra.26 for ; Sun, 05 Oct 2008 15:31:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.100.139.2 with SMTP id m2mr1222162and.114.1223245862019; Sun, 05 Oct 2008 15:31:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.100.94.12 with HTTP; Sun, 5 Oct 2008 15:31:01 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: Date: Sun, 5 Oct 2008 15:31:01 -0700 From: "Alec Warner" Sender: antarus@scriptkitty.com To: "Thilo Bangert" Subject: Re: [gentoo-scm] Re: Welcome to Gentoo-SCM discussion, for figuring out Gentoo beyond CVS Cc: gentoo-scm@lists.gentoo.org In-Reply-To: <200810052359.49834.bangert@gentoo.org> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo SCM discussions X-BeenThere: gentoo-scm@gentoo.org X-BeenThere: gentoo-scm@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <200810052359.49834.bangert@gentoo.org> X-Google-Sender-Auth: 60cc932cb0436f3a X-Archives-Salt: fe7e8fc1-4daa-4dcf-9ce5-4959ee90e08d X-Archives-Hash: 570460fa9f7f26c701b2942fbfa4489d On Sun, Oct 5, 2008 at 2:59 PM, Thilo Bangert wrote: > dberkholz wrote: >> > 4. >> > Doing more test migrations, and having a test-plan for comparing them >> > directly, as well as against other SCMs. > >> The OpenSolaris link above is quite useful for comparisons, and the >> "Repository Formats Matter" post from Keith Packard is helpful for >> understanding one good reason why git might be the best choice. > > reading "Repository Formats Matter" again, finally made me try git a > little more thoroughly. but honestly - all i care about, is that we > switch away from CVS. no other VCS is that bad... > >> Same as above, what are our requirements and what doesn't matter? Here's >> the OpenSolaris list: >> http://opensolaris.org/os/community/tools/scm/dscmreqdoc/ > >> Important >> - Fast branching (This will make it possible for new styles of >> development in Gentoo.) >> - Fast committing (This will encourage more atomic commits from a >> functional POV.) >> - Reliable (Repository format & committing process guarantee no >> corruption.) >> - Usability (This can be either discoverable or through good >> documention, found elsewhere or produced by us.) >> - Modifiable (Written in a reasonably common language. Read: Python, C >> or shell. git and bzr qualify, darcs doesn't.) >> - Active upstream (Getting modifications into upstream code, >> requesting features) >> - Hooks (Implement custom checks upon commit to your or main >> repository.) >> >> Optional >> - Partial checkouts. They aren't useful enough to be a requirement, in >> my view, because I have yet to hear a good reason they're needed. A >> gig or two of disk space is cheap. >> - Integration into popular text editors >> - CVS gateway (people can still commit using CVS) >> - Shallow checkouts (Only getting partial history to reduce size. git >> supports grafting two repositories together, not sure about other >> SCMs. Not sure how to do the initial splice. Explore >> 'git-filter-branch'?) > > AFAICT git fits the bill for all important and most optional points. > >> Another point I'd like to get into is how we should architect this. >> Should we stick with the single repository for the whole thing, or >> should we break it down so that each package has its own repository? If >> we go with the latter, we need to figure out a way to easily check out & >> update the whole repo. > > thinking about repository changes may drag the conversion to another VCS > out indefintively. for that reason we should limit our selves to > currently just picking a new VCS and then later discuss the changes we > may want to do to the repository layout (the ebuild dir comes to mind)... Except some VCS are more usable with different repo layouts; how do you intend to reconcile these differences? > > ..but lets get the ball rolling. drobbins is already publishing a git tree > and we should make sure we dont get overtaken from left AND right... :) > > best regards > Thilo >