From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 18752 invoked by alias); 14 Oct 2011 14:58:33 -0000 Received: (qmail 18734 invoked by uid 22791); 14 Oct 2011 14:58:31 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.7 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Fri, 14 Oct 2011 14:58:07 +0000 Received: from int-mx01.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx01.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.11]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id p9EEw1ZC022346 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Fri, 14 Oct 2011 10:58:01 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.9.1]) by int-mx01.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id p9EEw0bI017866; Fri, 14 Oct 2011 10:58:00 -0400 From: Phil Muldoon To: =?utf-8?B?QW5kcsOpIFDDtm5pdHo=?= Cc: gdb@sourceware.org Subject: Re: GIT and CVS References: <201110141435.59962.andre.poenitz@nokia.com> Reply-to: pmuldoon@redhat.com X-URL: http://www.redhat.com Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2011 14:58:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <201110141435.59962.andre.poenitz@nokia.com> (=?utf-8?Q?=22An?= =?utf-8?Q?dr=C3=A9_P=C3=B6nitz=22's?= message of "Fri, 14 Oct 2011 14:35:59 +0200") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2011-10/txt/msg00126.txt.bz2 Andr=C3=A9 P=C3=B6nitz writes: > Not sure whether a mere gdb _user's_ input is asked for here, but as I > try to stay somewhat in touch with the code I am affected by the SCM=20 > system gdb uses, too. Only a little, but enough to care.=20 It's asked for and welcomed. > So... > > I personally don't _like_ git. Right, I don't think it will any personality contests. But without doubt it is powerful tool. > It just (subjectively...) happens to be best-of-breed right now, so it is= =20 > what I use if I have a choice. For non-git based projects I often enough > create a local git 'mirror' for browsing, history walking etc. With gdb I= find > myself almost exclusively using a clone of git://sourceware.org/git/gdb.g= it. I do too. > I have also the impression that most of the recent gdb improvements were > done by people using git and "ported" to CVS afterwards. Making the lifes > of active contributors easier by removing this extra step should benefit = the=20 > project as a whole. Right, and what I asked with this email was to get a picture of the contributors and what their workflow was. Is anyone using CVS on a daily basis for active development. We cannot go to the server and get usage stats as each commit has to use CVS. > * All ChangeLog related discussion is a red herring. One _could_ have a p= lain > text file called "ChangeLog" in a git repo without complications. I think mixing these two topics was wrong on my part .=20=20 > * "Git sucks on MS-Windows". Git is usable on Windows to a degree that pr= ojects > much bigger than gdb switched to it, after careful consideration of a lot= of > alternatives, including commercial offerings. My main work currently is o= n a > smaller cross platform project about 3/4 the "total size" of gdb (includi= ng > bfd, libiberty, etc) and this is certainly in a very usable state on Win= dows. That's interesting, is there an active community around GIT there? > * The timing discussion revolves around use cases where git is slower, in > the single-digit or even fraction-of-a second range. The discussion, howe= ver,=20 > does not include any use cases reflecting workflows _enabled_ by that=20 > "slowness" that are not even remotely feasible in the CVS world. "git bis= ect" > comes to mind. Use it _once_ and you have set off a life time's worth of= =20 > "wasting" half seconds on annotation. Not to mention the branching,=20 > merging and rebasing business.=20 The one workflow, to me, is cvs diffs. Maybe it is because I am in the UK but CVS diffs are just painfully slow. And commits. Sometimes taking 10+ minutes to complete. Cheers, Phil