From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 27554 invoked by alias); 5 Sep 2007 13:14:21 -0000 Received: (qmail 27543 invoked by uid 22791); 5 Sep 2007 13:14:20 -0000 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DK_POLICY_SIGNSOME,FORGED_RCVD_HELO X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from wildebeest.demon.nl (HELO gnu.wildebeest.org) (83.160.170.119) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Wed, 05 Sep 2007 13:14:10 +0000 Received: from dijkstra.wildebeest.org ([192.168.1.29]) by gnu.wildebeest.org with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1ISuhk-0000o6-Ja; Wed, 05 Sep 2007 15:14:07 +0200 Subject: cvs, hg, git, etc. Re: meeting 2007-09-05 9:30 US-EAST From: Mark Wielaard To: Tim Moore Cc: frysk@sourceware.org In-Reply-To: <46DE81CA.3060909@redhat.com> References: <46DDA804.3000708@redhat.com> <46DE81CA.3060909@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Wed, 05 Sep 2007 13:14:00 -0000 Message-Id: <1188998040.3813.34.camel@dijkstra.wildebeest.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.8.3 (2.8.3-2.fc6) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: -4.4 (----) X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact frysk-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: frysk-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2007-q3/txt/msg00381.txt.bz2 On Wed, 2007-09-05 at 12:15 +0200, Tim Moore wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > Andrew Cagney wrote: > > Topic is mercurial vs git vs cvs. > > > http://lwn.net/Articles/246381/ is interesting on the subject of git repository > styles, distributed vs centralized, etc. Here is a super short summary of git vs hg: http://blog.experimentalworks.net/archives/38-Git-vs.-Mercurial.html it has one big flaw in that it missed named branches in hg: http://hgbook.red-bean.com/hgbookch8.html (The Mercurial book is pretty good btw, go read it cover to cover!) Personally I am actually fine with staying with cvs. I like to tinker with different cms like setting up the hg and trac clones. I try to use them locally, but I cannot say I am expert enough to recommend one. The real issues to discuss imho are: - Does anybody have a good workflow in mind if we switch to any dcms? Although I can use it for simple stuff myself I don't really know how any of the more advantaged usages (vendor branch tracking for example) really work out. - Is having the whole group learn a complete new set of tools and concepts really that beneficial over just staying with cvs? - What does sourceware actually support? - Who wants to maintain the system/set it up/keep track of issues/etc. Although it isn't that hard, I could setup the hg and trac mirror over the weekend, it is real work and needs someone to babysit it the first few weeks to help everybody get up to speed and make sure it doesn't fall over in production use. Cheers, Mark