Public SourceMage Discussion List

[Eric Sandall <eric AT sandall.us>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Jeremy Blosser (emrys) wrote:
> On Apr 12, Jeremy Blosser (emrys) [jblosser-smgl AT firinn.org] wrote:
>> The current identified SCMs to try are git, svk, and svn.  git is most
>> similar to bzr (which the other teams are already using) and has a very
>> robust feature set.  svk is most similar to p4.  svn is probably in the
>> widest general community use.   Is this the right list?  Do we have some
>> volunteer gurus/sections for each? 
> 
> svk is ready.  The size requirements are closer to p4, but still higher.
> The checkout directory with all four current branches is 425M, the .svk
> meta directory each checkout has is another 248M.  This is without any real
> history.  The initial checkout is for the 248M and takes quite a long time
> (it was close to 2 hours here).  status/etc. commands are a good bit
> quicker than svn.  I'll save the other comments and benchmarks for now but
> in general I don't like it nearly as well as git from an admin standpoint.
<snip>

Thanks for setting that up, Jeremy. :)

> Some more things:
> 
> I redid the wiki page for git to hopefully be more clear and correct, the
> info on here should be good for day-to-day use now:
> http://wiki.sourcemage.org/Git_Guide
> 
> I moved the scmweb for git around a bit, use:
> http://scmweb.sourcemage.org/smgl/gitweb.cgi
> 
> 
> These are the 3 scm systems we said we'd set up for eval initially.  It's
> been suggested by a few people that we also try out mercurial (hg),
> especially since svn was basically a bust.  I've done a fair bit of initial
> research on it and it looks to me like it's very similar to git as a
> decentralized repository, but lagging behind git when used in any kind of
> centralized fashion like we need.  They have the basic functionality, but
> they tend to recommend against working with it that way.  On another note
> but also quite significant for us, they lack a direct cherry-pick command.
> You have to instead export a change from the src branch to a file and then
> import it into the dst branch.  Their main goal is to be very fast, but
> published benchmarks show them lagging behind git on speed.  In addition to
> the features I've spent some time talking to people in their community, and
> they aren't as good to go to as the git people are (they seem a good bit
> more obsessed with proving they're the best scm, for one thing, and expect
> you to change to fit their system's assumptions, for another... it's
> possible I just talked to the wrong people of course).  In general I just
> don't think this one would buy us anything over git (most people that use
> both also say this) and would probably actually be worse for our actual
> usage scenarios.  hg does probably have a smaller available command set
> than git does, but the actual commands people need to use day-to-day are
> the same, and there are other options for making git look simpler (one of
> the most promising is git's included cvsserver wrapper, to allow cvs
> clients to do checkouts and commits against git repositories).
> 
> Regardless, I can set up hg if people think we need to look at it, or we
> can just keep trying git out for a system that works like that and only
> pick up hg if we find things we don't like about git.  I am getting quite a
> few more requests from people to set up some extra stuff around git, so if
> I don't set up hg I can spend the time doing that instead.  Those include
> extending the gitweb interface and the commit hooks to interact with
> bugzilla and tweaking some more of the access things.  It's likely as
> people start to use svk that there will be some requests for things there,
> too... I still need to get the svk web frontend setup as well.
> 
> Thoughts?

I would go for leaving mercurial (hg) out, at least until the current
round of testing is done with Perforce, SVN/SVK, and git. To me git
seems to be doing quite well, with the only thing going for SVN/SVK is
it's currently more popular with more tools/front-ends for it and
Perforce already being setup and our developers familiar with it. :)

- -sandalle

- --
Eric Sandall                     |  Source Mage GNU/Linux Developer
eric AT sandall.us                  |  http://www.sourcemage.org/
http://eric.sandall.us/          |  SysAdmin @ Shock Physics @ WSU
http://counter.li.org/  #196285  |  http://www.shock.wsu.edu/
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFEb3KrHXt9dKjv3WERAo4eAKDKbEFjKpBzEPdPpv2kYyW10z6zwwCgsMHf
VkeM3YmmdDkoNroejH0Lzso=
=rTlp
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----