[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Revision control
From: |
Arne Babenhauserheide |
Subject: |
Re: Revision control |
Date: |
Thu, 19 Jun 2008 15:11:02 +0200 |
User-agent: |
KMail/1.9.9 |
Am Donnerstag 19 Juni 2008 00:46:55 schrieb olafBuddenhagen@gmx.net:
> > Once the Hurd has reached 1/100 of the RCS traffic of Linux, a switch
> > to a powerful tool might be feasable.
>
> That's like saying that it's only useful to run GNU/Linux on very large
> servers, because others don't need the power...
No.
It's like deciding to go on a trip through the country together and
saying: "We don't need racing cars which run only on a small subset of the
roads and have fancy controls most of us have to learn from scratch. We want
to drive together to a place we don't necessarily know already."
If we'd go to a racing competition, then racing cars would be useful. If we
want to go on a quite normal trip together, where pushing the limits of our
cars isn't our main objective, since we just want to reach our destination,
then I prefer avoiding the racing car in favor of a slightly slower car which
can get us to our destination which we can all drive without hitting the
trees several times and which just works.
With Git I already hit the trees several times, and I want to spare others
that experience.
The difference you name would in my opinion be better described by saying, we
only need OpenBSD on the most critical servers, because for the others, its
gain in security isn't worth the effort to set it up correctly and the time
to learn its quirks. Would you use OpenBSD in a university as shared working
server for people?
We only need the racing car, if we want to go on a race in having the most
complex version control workflow. But the easier controls of Mercurial help
us in every situation, and they especially help newbes to avoid hitting the
trees or having to replace tires.
One reason for wanting to be able to drive many different roads: The
informatics professor from whom I learned about the Hurd uses Windows on his
presentation machine (on which he also works quite often), and he wouldn't be
able to use Git efficiently in that environment.
Sure you can tell him "use your VMWare", but why not choose something which he
can use in whatever mode he is just now?
> There is probably a difference between a project with a single
> contributor, and a project with more than one. But otherwise, the size
> or activity of a project has very little influence on what kind of
> things the developers need or want to do regarding version control.
Just look at the workflows in Linux and in other projects. As far as I know,
there is a huge difference.
Linux works at one end of the spectrum, where the devs can force people to
learn their ways to the letter, because people want to contribute very badly
(else they would likely already leave when seeing the tone in the lkml
mailing list), and where very many people contribute to a partly monolitic
codebase in which about 40% of the sourcefiles change between two versions.
But the Hurd isn't in the position to force devs to learn new ways to
contribute (not that I like forcing people to do something they don't need).
It needs developers to be able to jump in easily, and every programmer lost
on that way due to an infight with Git would hurt quite much.
And Xen, xine, SymPy, OpenSolaris, OpenJDK, NetBeans and many others aren't
really one-dev projects, so they should be enough hard proof, that Mercurial
works well for bigger projects.
But in the end, much about the current distributed version control systems
depends on gut feeling, personal preferences and the needs of the specific
project, since they are quite similar, and there is one big shiny light at
the end of the decision tunnel:
Whatever we choose, the technical side of switching the files and all history
from one to another is very easy, since there are simple automated tools for
the task (Git to Mercurial as well as Mercurial to Git).
Best wishes,
Arne
--
Unpolitisch sein
Heißt politisch sein
Ohne es zu merken.
- Arne Babenhauserheide ( http://draketo.de )
-- Weblog: http://blog.draketo.de
-- Infinite Hands: http://infinite-hands.draketo.de - singing a part of the
history of free software.
-- Ein Würfel System: http://1w6.org - einfach saubere (Rollenspiel-) Regeln
-- Mein öffentlicher Schlüssel (PGP/GnuPG):
http://draketo.de/inhalt/ich/pubkey.txt
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
- Re: Revision control, (continued)
- Re: Revision control, olafBuddenhagen, 2008/06/17
- Re: Revision control, Arne Babenhauserheide, 2008/06/23
- Re: Revision control, olafBuddenhagen, 2008/06/26
- Re: Revision control, Arne Babenhauserheide, 2008/06/26
- Re: Revision control, olafBuddenhagen, 2008/06/28
- Re: Revision control, Arne Babenhauserheide, 2008/06/28
- Re: Revision control, olafBuddenhagen, 2008/06/29
- Re: Revision control, Arne Babenhauserheide, 2008/06/30
- Re: Revision control, Michael Banck, 2008/06/17
- Re: Revision control, olafBuddenhagen, 2008/06/18
- Re: Revision control,
Arne Babenhauserheide <=
- Re: Revision control, olafBuddenhagen, 2008/06/19
- Re: Revision control, Arne Babenhauserheide, 2008/06/20
- Re: Revision control, olafBuddenhagen, 2008/06/22
- Re: Revision control, Arne Babenhauserheide, 2008/06/23
Re: Revision control, Ivan Shmakov, 2008/06/04
Re: Revision control, Ivan Shmakov, 2008/06/04