[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: git vs. svn (again)



Ivan Vučica schrieb:
> Hi,
> 
> On Sat, Sep 12, 2009 at 21:12, Christoph Egger
> <debian@christoph-egger.org <mailto:debian@christoph-egger.org>> wrote:
> 
> 
>     Hi all!
> 
>            I'm not sure it is true. I totally agree git is adding unneeded
>     complexity (multiple remotes to follow e.g.) and has some features that
>     might be handy but add complexity (local commits). However Git gives you
>     a perfectly dpkg-buildpackage buildable checkout while svn doesn't and
>     works around some mayour pitfalls (things I still get caught like rm and
>     mv should *never* be done but "svn rm" or "svn mv").
> 
> 
> What do you mean, it doesn't give you dpkg-buildpackage-able checkout?
> If you are only referring to .svn folders, remember there is also 'svn
> export' command. Otherwise, since I haven't used git and since I'm a
> relatively novice packager (mostly doing my own packages since I don't
> have anything to submit into Debian)  I'd like to know what's so bad
> about SVN :-)
> 
> -- 
> Regards,
> 
> Ivan Vučica

Hi!

	What I mean was, that the SVN checkout, as used in the games team, only
contains the debian dir. So you have to first «merge it with upstream
sources» in SVN-bp speak to make it useable with the stock commands and
the «normal» way of dealing with it is through the svn-buildpackage
command not the stock dpkg-bp and debuild ones.

	.svn folders are absolutely no problem, just pass -i to
dpkg-buildpackage or (if you just want to test a fix) simply ignore them
untill upload.

	I know the svn-inject -o / merge-with-upstream thing is only one
possible setup for SVN but *please* don't start to include full sources
in SVN!

	This is basically a point where I disagree with goneri's remark about
branches in git. in SVN you have a implicit branch (the tarball that is
located using some svn properties) and a diff to that in SVN. In git you
have the upstream branch and the debian branch. You never need to care,
git-import-orig takes care of the branches stuff quite as well as svn-bp
handles changing the tarballs.

	I don't think SVN is bad. I just think that while git has definitely
more complexity there are some oddities in the svn-layout as well. And
the most troubling one IMHO is the fact you need to use special commands
for everything.

	Just try to cp a svn tracked directory (not svn cp) and parse the error
messages while trying to add it to the tree. I doubt any newcomer to VCS
will succed there without help while git handles cp,rm,mv correctly even
if done with standard commands.

	And because I already put in some points I forgot in my first mail:
topgit is really preventing newcomers. It's not RTFM but simply for the
reason there is no exhausive manual and both of topgit's maintainers
think it needs a total rewrite.

Regards

	Christoph

-- 
/"\  ASCII Ribbon : GPG-Key ID: 0x0372275D
\ /    Campaign   : GPG 4096R : 0xD49AE731
 X   against HTML : Debian NM
/ \   in eMails   : http://www.debian.org/

http://www.christoph-egger.org/

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Reply to: