[haiku-development] Re: Git/Hg: some speed tests

  • From: Clemens <clemens.zeidler@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: haiku-development@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Thu, 05 May 2011 09:26:17 +1200

On Thu, 05 May 2011 08:53:18 +1200, Oliver Tappe <zooey@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:


This brings me back to Ryan's point. What is the use of central
revision tracking? I can think of only one, which is during build-time
where Haiku's revision is set. I agree that it might be very
beneficial to track that, so what we might do is have the build system
phone home to check whether the current revision is in haiku-central,
perhaps even add the sequential number (in case of hg). If it is from
a local commit, or an alternative tree, have it walk up to the nearest
central revision that it is derived from and note that in the about
window. During jamming often a network connection is required anyway
because of fetching the packages, so we are not really adding another
dependency.

The argument included the notion that incremental revision numbers
facilitate comparing different revisions, e.g. when trying to find out if a revision mentioned in a Trac ticket is sooner or later than the head in your
local repo.

The part that really baffles me in this discussion is that, when we started
it a long time ago, not supporting incremental revision numbers was
considered a strong argument against git, now that the tide has turned (Git supporting it and Mercurial not), it isn't important anymore? When I joined
the DVCS "task force", support for incremental revision numbers *was* an
explicit feature request and I invested quite some time to implement that
with git.
We once had the vision that the workflow is more important than the tool
(and you, Niels, were a very strong supporter of that, IIRC). I personally
don't prefer Git over Mercurial, all I'm saying is that Git is a better
match for our intended workflow (as it was outlined before we started the
task force).

Are we instead now going to define our workflow around the tool that will
win the vote?

cheers,
        Oliver


@axel: svn is really not an option IMHO, I want to share branches like tracker branch in the main repo...

git GUI bindings: http://libgit2.github.com/ looks not to bad

central ref numbers, is hg an option anymore?

        Clemens

ps: vote for git now. the guy who setting every thing up should have 20 extra votes anyway ;)

Other related posts: