make-w32
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Switching from CVS to GIT


From: Paul Smith
Subject: Re: Switching from CVS to GIT
Date: Sun, 14 Oct 2007 12:57:20 -0400

On Sat, 2007-10-13 at 21:10 +0200, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> Can you tell why?

The main reasons are lack of functionality in CVS re renaming, removing,
and reorganizing files.  However, it's not a critical issue; I've lived
with it for this long.  The other problems CVS has (poor branch/merge,
no atomicity, server-only repositories, etc.) are not as big a problem
for a project the size of GNU make.

Another reason others have mentioned is making it simple for
"downstream" folks to work on make.  Ideally I'd be happy to hand over
maintenance of the non-POSIX ports (for example) to others more
completely, and just pull from their changed trees.  A sort of very,
very miniature version of the Linux kernel development model.  It's not
such a huge hardship for me to apply patches that I really mind the
current environment but it might help others--assuming that the tool
works properly in their environment of course.

It looks like (as someone else mentioned) SVN may be supported on
Savannah "soonish".  So another option is to wait for that.  I certainly
don't want to switch more than once, if I do decide to switch.

Originally SVN would have been my definite preference, just based on its
similarity to CVS and its portability.  However, others have asked
explicitly for GIT due to its distributed development model.  Also the
other autotools are all switching to GIT.

So, maybe we should back up and reconsider: which of the four tools
Savannah does or apparently will soon support do people feel is the best
for GNU make: (1) stay with CVS, (2) GNU arch, (3) GIT, (4) Subversion.
I've seen a lot of pro/con discussions which I can summarize if people
want, but the big thing no one else seems to have addressed much in
other discussions I've seen is portability.  It LOOKS like there are
native ports of GIT to MINGW, but I have no idea how complete and usable
they are.  If someone who has a Windows system could look into that it
would be a big help.

-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Paul D. Smith <address@hidden>          Find some GNU make tips at:
 http://www.gnu.org                      http://make.mad-scientist.us
 "Please remain calm...I may be mad, but I am a professional." --Mad Scientist




reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]