FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > ArchLinux > ArchLinux Development

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 08-25-2011, 10:08 AM
Ray Rashif
 
Default Git for the repos

On 25 August 2011 07:04, Dan McGee <dpmcgee@gmail.com> wrote:
> ...
> SNIP
> ...
> Great. Another bitchfest on this topic! I'm going to get a bit pissy
> here because it isn't like git wasn't around when we moved to SVN, and
> we came to the conclusion then that the workflow with git was no
> better/worse than the one proposed by Jason Chu using SVN.
> ...
> SNIP
> ...

I share the same sentiments bit for bit, so I am in full agreement
with Dan, JGC, Allan & Ionut. I have always stressed the fact, even
just very recently, to someone who was interested in Arch, that even
though I use Git personally, Subversion makes the most sense for (our
kind of) packaging.

Aside from that, it's not about technical prowess, but about the worth
of the migration work needed. What do we gain and what do we lose? How
much significance do the gains have with regards to our workflow?


--
GPG/PGP ID: 8AADBB10
 
Old 08-25-2011, 02:08 PM
Paul Mattal
 
Default Git for the repos

On 08/25/2011 06:08 AM, Ray Rashif wrote:

I share the same sentiments bit for bit, so I am in full agreement
with Dan, JGC, Allan& Ionut. I have always stressed the fact, even
just very recently, to someone who was interested in Arch, that even
though I use Git personally, Subversion makes the most sense for (our
kind of) packaging.


I register my vote for keeping SVN, too; it was the right tool for
this particular job when we chose it, and I think it's still the
right tool for this particular job.


- P
 
Old 08-25-2011, 02:35 PM
Ángel Velásquez
 
Default Git for the repos

2011/8/24 Florian Pritz <bluewind@xinu.at>:
> So it came up in IRC again and I'll try to sum up the discussion:
>
> SVN checkouts tend to break, some people only use it for our repos and
> not anywhere else, it's slow.
>
> We agreed on one git repo per package because you can't do partial
> checkouts in git and you hardly need the history of all packages anyway.
>
> To keep track of released packages, dbscripts maintains it's own (git?)
> meta database which contains only the package version and pacman repo of
> the package. The version corresponds to a tag in the package's git repo.
>
> We can't use tags like "testing-i686" because you can't reuse tags in git.
>
> I'd like to hear some comments about this.
>
> --
> Florian Pritz
>
>

First I need to ask some questions (understant that I don't get why is
this getting proposed)

Well, why are us needing of git? what goal we want to achieve? ..

Devtools have some complications (X number of commits for package i.e)
but, this will change with git? how? .. it will git increase the speed
or the workflow of our devtools? why git, not hg, darcs or another
DVCS?

So in resume, (despite the questions) I didn't get why we need to move
our actual schema to other stuff, at the end of the day, we have to
implement or tools to work above one of those systems on our own
devtools, and eventually is trying to pass a circle into a rectangle
..

After all I didn't saw any strong points yet, but if there is one at
least, i will for sure totally support it.

Just my opinion, please don't get this personal, we are a team, we are
right to speak, and we must work in some kind of armony, I bet we all
want the best for the project, so we are on the same boat .. don't
forget that.




--
Angel Velásquez
angvp @ irc.freenode.net
Arch Linux Developer / Trusted User
Linux Counter: #359909
http://www.angvp.com
 
Old 08-25-2011, 02:38 PM
Andrea Scarpino
 
Default Git for the repos

On Thu, 25 Aug 2011, 16:08:33 CEST, Paul Mattal <paul@mattal.com> wrote:
> I register my vote for keeping SVN, too; it was the right tool for
> this particular job when we chose it, and I think it's still the
> right tool for this particular job.
Agree. -1 to switch to Git. Our job doesn't need a local server for the commits, we don't need to switch again.

--
Andrea
 
Old 08-25-2011, 05:38 PM
Andreas Radke
 
Default Git for the repos

Am Wed, 24 Aug 2011 22:53:55 +0200
schrieb Florian Pritz <bluewind@xinu.at>:

> So it came up in IRC again and I'll try to sum up the discussion:
>
> SVN checkouts tend to break, some people only use it for our repos and
> not anywhere else, it's slow.

Latest devtools changes break some commits not copying files into the
repos directories.

Subversion doesn't feel that fast. But it has done its job very well for
a long time until somebody broke it. So please keep it and fix/revert
broken commits. No need to reinvent the whole process again.

-Andy
 
Old 08-25-2011, 05:41 PM
Eric Bélanger
 
Default Git for the repos

On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 1:38 PM, Andreas Radke <andyrtr@archlinux.org> wrote:
> Am Wed, 24 Aug 2011 22:53:55 +0200
> schrieb Florian Pritz <bluewind@xinu.at>:
>
>> So it came up in IRC again and I'll try to sum up the discussion:
>>
>> SVN checkouts tend to break, some people only use it for our repos and
>> not anywhere else, it's slow.
>
> Latest devtools changes break some commits not copying files into the
> repos directories.
>

There is a patch in arch-project ML to fix that.

Another +1 for keeping svn.


> Subversion doesn't feel that fast. But it has done its job very well for
> a long time until somebody broke it. So please keep it and fix/revert
> broken commits. No need to reinvent the whole process again.
>
> -Andy
>
 
Old 08-25-2011, 06:30 PM
Lukas Fleischer
 
Default Git for the repos

On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 01:41:50PM -0400, Eric Bélanger wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 1:38 PM, Andreas Radke <andyrtr@archlinux.org> wrote:
> > Am Wed, 24 Aug 2011 22:53:55 +0200
> > schrieb Florian Pritz <bluewind@xinu.at>:
> >
> >> So it came up in IRC again and I'll try to sum up the discussion:
> >>
> >> SVN checkouts tend to break, some people only use it for our repos and
> >> not anywhere else, it's slow.
> >
> > Latest devtools changes break some commits not copying files into the
> > repos directories.
> >
>
> There is a patch in arch-project ML to fix that.

Pierre pushed that patch some hours ago [1], so this should be fixed
with the next devtools release.

[1] http://projects.archlinux.org/devtools.git/commit/?id=c2420902
 
Old 08-25-2011, 06:46 PM
Lukas Fleischer
 
Default Git for the repos

On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 11:35:47AM -0300, Ángel Velásquez wrote:
> 2011/8/24 Florian Pritz <bluewind@xinu.at>:
> > So it came up in IRC again and I'll try to sum up the discussion:
> >
> > SVN checkouts tend to break, some people only use it for our repos and
> > not anywhere else, it's slow.
> >
> > We agreed on one git repo per package because you can't do partial
> > checkouts in git and you hardly need the history of all packages anyway.
> >
> > To keep track of released packages, dbscripts maintains it's own (git?)
> > meta database which contains only the package version and pacman repo of
> > the package. The version corresponds to a tag in the package's git repo.
> >
> > We can't use tags like "testing-i686" because you can't reuse tags in git.
> >
> > I'd like to hear some comments about this.
> >
> > --
> > Florian Pritz
> >
> >
>
> First I need to ask some questions (understant that I don't get why is
> this getting proposed)
>
> Well, why are us needing of git? what goal we want to achieve? ..
>
> Devtools have some complications (X number of commits for package i.e)
> but, this will change with git? how? .. it will git increase the speed
> or the workflow of our devtools? why git, not hg, darcs or another
> DVCS?

Dan and me worked on some patches to reduce the number of commits
recently [1], [2], [3] and devtools-git only commits twice per commitpkg
invocation. First commit to push changes to trunk, second commit to
release to the repositories.

Note that this has some impacts on speed. This is mostly related to SVN
and the way we need to create tags when releasing to the repositories
with a single commit. I pointed that out in a separate thread on
arch-projects [4] but I sadly didn't get any feedback yet. Maybe this
should be considered, also. Not that I have a strong feeling about it. I
just thought I should mention it.

[1] http://projects.archlinux.org/devtools.git/commit/?id=8384ad84
[2] http://projects.archlinux.org/devtools.git/commit/?id=6ef4d5f3
[3] http://projects.archlinux.org/devtools.git/commit/?id=61010062
[4] http://mailman.archlinux.org/pipermail/arch-projects/2011-August/001748.html
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 11:44 AM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright ©2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org