[Openmcl-devel] How about Git?

Gary Byers gb at clozure.com
Sun Nov 29 19:03:18 PST 2015

On 11/29/2015 04:16 PM, Dmitry Igrishin wrote:
> 2015-11-30 0:42 GMT+03:00 R. Matthew Emerson <rme at clozure.com 
> <mailto:rme at clozure.com>>:
>>     On Nov 29, 2015, at 2:34 PM, Dmitry Igrishin <dfigrish at gmail.com
>>     <mailto:dfigrish at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>     Dear developers,
>>     Whether time came to migrate to Git? Are there are any such
>>     intentions, or your are comfortable with SVN and it is not a subject
>>     for discussion?
>     Speaking for myself only, it's just not clear that a switch would
>     be beneficial.  It seems like it would just be following a fashion
>     trend.   But maybe I'm stupid and ugly. (cf.
>     https://youtu.be/4XpnKHJAok8?t=487)
>     We've been using Trac for tickets, and that works well with
>     Subversion.  Subversion deals reasonably well with largish binary
>     files (like bootstrapping heap images).  Our (ab)use of externals
>     also gives us a way for users to get a working installation with a
>     single command.
>     I agree that git is very popular, and I know that many people find
>     that github alone is a reason to use git.  But I like to host my
>     own stuff, and I just can't see how a switch would improve the
>     life of ccl hackers all that much.  Maybe I haven't yet seen the
>     light.
> Because the Git is very popular this may be one of the factors to make 
> it easer to work
> with code for hackers who forget SVN. (Like me :).)
> The one of the main Git advantages is a great support for real 
> branching which is very helpful.
> After all, Git is fast and pleasent to work with.

I don't use git often enough  to be familiar with it, and (largely as a 
result of that ignorance)
I find git to be slow and unpleasant to use ...

I agree with the observation that it is often too much of a big 
production to create a branch
in svn, and a "local, private branch" isn't even a meaningful concept in 
a centralized system
like svn.

svn externals address what they try to address fairly well, but have 
always seemed like
an afterthought and their use -as we use them- seems to introduce its 
own set of problems.
As far as I know and from what other people who have tried to use them 
have said, git's
submodules have similar issues.

At one point. it seemed desirable to offer a simple way of getting 
sources and platform-
specific binaries; I'm not sure that there is a compelling reason not to 
package things
into a single distribution anymore, even if that meant getting binaries 
that one didn't
need and probably couldn't run. At the very least, I'm not sure that the 
reasons for
using svn externals (or git submodules) are as compelling as they once 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.clozure.com/pipermail/openmcl-devel/attachments/20151129/9f2ce211/attachment.htm>

More information about the Openmcl-devel mailing list