[Openmcl-devel] How about Git?

[Tim Bradshaw]

On 30 Nov 2015, at 16:14, Robert P. Goldman <rpgoldman at sift.info> wrote:

> Having used both git and SVN, I appreciate the utility of git as a DVCS.
> I am *not* convinced that it is better than SVN as a CENTRALIZED VCS.
> git submodules in particular are a hot mess (they couldn't be as solid
> as SVN externals because git is a DVCS).

I think also that, if you wanted to make contribute a relatively small change to CCL you probably need to know two things: (1) 'svn co', 'svn update' and 'svn diff' and, perhaps, 'svn merge' (do you need this if you get conflicts on update?  I forget), all of which work the obvious way; (2) a reasonably detailed understanding of CL, and perhaps of the idiosyncracies of the particular implementation and, if you are particularly unlucky, the horrors of modern OS interfaces.  One of those things is overwhelmingly more complex than the other.

A further point to think about is that there are people who have tools which rely on the current SVN repo to work: I know there is at least one, me.  This shouldn't block a change of course, but it would be worth finding out who those people are and how inconvenienced they would be. In my case it's a couple of hundred lines of shell script which I haven't changed since 2012: it's probably not a huge lot of work to change it although I'd like not to have to.  It obviously should not block any change: I can spend an evening fixing it.

Note again I'm writing this as someone who uses git for all his own sources: I'm not an SVN holdout.

--tim