[webkit-dev] Moving to Git?

[Alexis Menard]

On Thu, Mar 8, 2012 at 7:30 PM, Alexis Menard
<alexis.menard at openbossa.org> wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 8, 2012 at 7:10 PM, Maciej Stachowiak <mjs at apple.com> wrote:
>>
>> It seems like there are a couple of different issues here that affect how we
>> do version control. Currently we have an SVN primary repository, some
>> contributors use SVN, and others use git via git-svn.
>>
>> It seems like there are two possible changes we can make, and it is not
>> really clear to me which is being advocated:
>>
>> 1) Offer only a git repository; everyone uses git.
>> 2) Use a git central repository; but some form of svn access is provided (is
>> this even possible?)
>>
>> And then there is the status quo:
>>
>> 3) Continue doing what we're doing; central repository is svn, but anyone is
>> free to use git and we try to make it convenient to do so.
>>
>> One interesting asymmetry here is that, while many git users proseltyze git
>> and advocate total removal of svn support from our tools and infrastructure,
>> no one seems to advocate completely removing git support. So I left that
>> option off. There are also other distributed version control systems out
>> there such as Mercurial or Bazaar, but no one seems much in favor of using
>> them for WebKit, so those options are also left off.
>>
>> If we are to assess these options in a deeper way than just everyone saying
>> what they personally like, we need to identify the pros and cons of options
>> (1) and (2) relative to (3). That's assuming (2) is even possible. It seems
>> like there are at least a few factors to consider:
>>
>> A) Future quality of life for current git users.
>> B) Future quality of life for current svn users.
>> C) Benefits of the master repository being either git or svn, regardless of
>> what clients are supported. (For example, many folks seem to think
>> human-understandable revision identifiers is a benefit of the master being
>> SVN).
>> D) Cost to the project of maintaining support for two different version
>> control systems.
>>
>> Git advocates on this thread have mostly focused on convincing svn users how
>> much they'd like using git instead. It seems at least some svn users do not
>> believe their quality of life would improve by switching to git, including
>> some who have actually tried git. No one has really identified what benefits
>> there would be to git users if a change is made. Could someone describe
>> those?
>
> To the global infrastructure :
> - Local history for git. svn log access to the server every time you
> call that command. Will improve the load of the server.
> - Performance of checkouts/pull as data are send compressed from the server.
>
> To git user :
> - Using git push rather than having to use git-svn (which you need to
> keep in sync).
> - Simplified workflow, we don't need to mess with git-svn.
> - Companies who fork (we all do) can simplify their workflow a bit
> regarding branches.
>
> To svn user :
> - Conflict resolving much easier and performant than svn (we have
> drivers for changelogs and the default one are much better than svn).
> - Local history/blaming/...
> - Proper diff coloration (though I'm sure you guys have some magic
> scripts using colordiff).
> - The staging area, upload what you want/need and keep some work local
> - Smaller checkouts

- Bot maintainers :
Power outage or network interruption in the middle of a svn
checkout/up lock the repo sometimes and you need to manually svn
cleanup the checkout (maybe someone have a tool or script to avoid
that???). I had much more svn locked repos than git dead checkout
because of interruptions.

>
> The real downside is for the svn users to learn a bit git workflow.
>
> I'm forgetting stuff for sure.
>
>>
>> Regards,
>> Maciej
>>
>>
>> On Mar 8, 2012, at 12:13 PM, Antonio Gomes wrote:
>>
>> (For those valuable contributors who are against Git and have manifested
>> somehow here, please do not take it personally)
>>
>> IMO, none of the arguments used here so far seem like a real problem for a
>> switch. Of course, SVN people would have to adapt their workflow and it
>> could take days (no more than that, trust me), but it is for a greater goal
>> at the end.
>>
>> In my opinion, SVN concepts are completely obsolete these days. It is hard
>> to me to even hear someone arguing in favor of SVN against GIT, but I
>> respect anyone's opinion. I just do not feel them strong enough given the
>> whole context.
>>
>> On Thu, Mar 8, 2012 at 3:05 PM, Joe Mason <jmason at rim.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> It seems to me that there's no need to use multiple local branches in git
>>> if you find it confusing - it's an additional feature, but I don't see
>>> anything that requires it.
>>>
>>> What workflow do you have that requires you to have multiple branches
>>> locally in git, and how do you solve it in svn without using branches?
>>>
>>> What precisely do you find difficult about merging remote changes, and how
>>> is the svn equivalent easier?
>>> ________________________________
>>> From: webkit-dev-bounces at lists.webkit.org
>>> [webkit-dev-bounces at lists.webkit.org] on behalf of Ryosuke Niwa
>>> [rniwa at webkit.org]
>>> Sent: Thursday, March 08, 2012 3:00 PM
>>> To: Ashod Nakashian
>>> Cc: WebKit Development
>>> Subject: Re: [webkit-dev] Moving to Git?
>>>
>>> On Thu, Mar 8, 2012 at 11:24 AM, Ashod Nakashian
>>> <ashodnakashian at yahoo.com<mailto:ashodnakashian at yahoo.com>> wrote:
>>> >And that's a show stopper for me. For build bot maintenance, regression
>>> > fixes, etc... being able to easily tell the number of commits between two
>>> > revisions (in my head as opposed to using a tool) or the ordering of commits
>>> > is crucial.
>>>
>>> I think this is an interesting point. It seems there are two solutions. We
>>> can enforce fast-forward as many have pointed out and we can maintain an SVN
>>> mirror. Although I don't like the idea of maintaining an SVN repo, and it's
>>> almost universally agreed that git offers superior tools to SVN.
>>>
>>> I don't think so. I like the simplicity of svn. While git client works
>>> great, I always get frustrated by the complexity of having multiple branches
>>> locally and the amount of work required to merge the remote changes on the
>>> branch I'm working on.
>>>
>>> - Ryosuke
>>>
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> This transmission (including any attachments) may contain confidential
>>> information, privileged material (including material protected by the
>>> solicitor-client or other applicable privileges), or constitute non-public
>>> information. Any use of this information by anyone other than the intended
>>> recipient is prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error,
>>> please immediately reply to the sender and delete this information from your
>>> system. Use, dissemination, distribution, or reproduction of this
>>> transmission by unintended recipients is not authorized and may be unlawful.
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> webkit-dev mailing list
>>> webkit-dev at lists.webkit.org
>>> http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> --Antonio Gomes
>> _______________________________________________
>> webkit-dev mailing list
>> webkit-dev at lists.webkit.org
>> http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> webkit-dev mailing list
>> webkit-dev at lists.webkit.org
>> http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Alexis Menard (darktears)
> Software Engineer
> INdT Recife Brazil



-- 
Alexis Menard (darktears)
Software Engineer
INdT Recife Brazil