[Openmcl-devel] About Contribs

[Daniel Weinreb]

Robert P. Goldman wrote:
> I'm glad that someone said this.
>
> There are some very compelling arguments for git adoption, but it's a much 
> more complex animal -- at least for the user (as opposed to the admin)  -- 
> than svn.
>   
According to Bryan O'Sullivan, for whom I have great respect,
Mercurial has the same thing that make git desirable, but is
much easier to use than git.

Bryan recently wrote a CACM article about distributed
revision control.  Bryan is also the author of a book
on Mercurial.  (He's also the first co-author of "Real
World Haskell", which is a very fine book.)

I have no personal experience with this.  We use svn
at ITA.  For a long time, we've been using a home-grown
script to deal with the merge problem.  I am told that
in the new svn, which we recently upgraded to, the situation
is greatly improved (svn keeps track of which changes in
the original line have and have not been merged) but I
do not know the specifics and have not tried it.

As far as I know we have no plans to switch from svn.

Here's a Google tech talk by Bryan, which I intend to watch
in my copious spare time. :(

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-7724296011317502612#

-- Dan



> If you must have git, then so be it. But if subversion is enough then I'd 
> urge you to stick with it.
>
> Best,
> r
> ___
> Robert P. Goldman
> Principal  Scientist, SIFT, LLC
> www.sift.info
>
> ...... Original Message .......
> On Mon, 14 Sep 2009 08:17:36 -0600 "Alexander Repenning" 
> <ralex at cs.colorado.edu> wrote:
>   
>> On Sep 12, 2009, at 11:04 AM, Ron Garret wrote:
>>
>>
>> SVN is the natural choice  
>> since CCL itself is hosted on SVN, but the world at large seems to be  
>> abandoning SVN in favor of Git and/or Mercurial.  The last time I  
>> checked (which was a while ago) SVN didn't do proper branch merging,  
>> which is a show-stopper as far as I'm concerned.  But maybe they've  
>> fixed that?
>>
>>
>>
>> Not really fixed. You have to do some semi manual merge. However, SVN is 
>>     
> not at all on the way out. A couple of discussions may make it sound is if 
> that were the case. Recently somebody actually produced some data regarding 
> the use of versioning systems. SVN is still gaining share, and gaining 
> faster than GIT and others combined. The World at large is essentially just 
> now dropping CVS for SNV. Statistically speaking GIT is barely showing up 
> on the stats. 
>   
>> Even if there were a GIT client with an actual user interface (I confess I 
>>     
> am not much of a command line person) I would still vote for using SVN. GIT 
> is likey to a be dangerous de-cohesiving  tool in the hands of Lisp 
> programmers. Take an already small community, realize few lisp programmers 
> ever agree on things and before you know it you have more unsupported  
> flavors of CCL than Linux distros.
>   
>> cheers,  Alex
>>
>>
>> Prof. Alexander Repenning
>>
>>
>>
>> University of Colorado
>>
>> Computer Science Department
>>
>> Boulder, CO 80309-430
>>
>>
>>
>> vCard: http://www.cs.colorado.edu/~ralex/AlexanderRepenning.vcf
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Openmcl-devel mailing list
>> Openmcl-devel at clozure.com
>> http://clozure.com/mailman/listinfo/openmcl-devel
>>     
>
> _______________________________________________
> Openmcl-devel mailing list
> Openmcl-devel at clozure.com
> http://clozure.com/mailman/listinfo/openmcl-devel
>   
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.clozure.com/pipermail/openmcl-devel/attachments/20090928/f4d9c206/attachment.htm>