From: Barry S. <bar...@on...> - 2006-09-27 11:31:08
|
James Courtier-Dutton wrote: > Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò wrote: > >> So, I've tried myself to do a conversion of xine's cvs to git, at least to >> try. The conversion took about 1.5 hours, and completed without big problems, >> the tags are found, too. I didn't set the names/email addresses corresponding >> to the users, but that's almost easy to do, just need to collect them. >> The result is a 30MB repository and a 58 MB empty checkout. >> >> I think I can look for hosting if this way is pursued. I'd actually like it, >> because it's easier to push the branches in a single repository, rather than >> breaking it up in different servers like a totally distributed environment. >> >> >> > I don't think git is the best solution for us. The aims of git are > different from our aims. > Git aims to let someone cherry pick which patches to include in their > own repository from other people, with everyone able to use their own > private repositories easily. > We have no such need for xine. > Or need is to consider and apply patches to a central repository. > I suggest we go to either SVN or mecurial(HG). > I have found HG good, but SVN is probably easier to move to because > SF.net already support it. > Personally I'd prefer you to use SVN. There are lots of good tools around SVN. SVN developers are working on the merge tracking problem and their solution will arrive, I think, in the next major release, 1.5.0. I have read on other lists that people have hit problems with complex merging with HG, I do not know if this is a limitation, bug or user error. I can understand why you would go with GIT. But I find it very hard to understand. I have never managed to update a branch in GIT without getting cryptic errors. I have to access git repos from a number of projects, Linux kernel, Xorg drivers. These days I simply rm -rf, git clone, git checkout. The lack of docs that are clear is the basic problem I see in coming up to speed. Barry |