Re: git vs. svn (again)
* Christoph Egger <debian@christoph-egger.org> [2009-09-12 21:12:53 CEST]:
> Git gives you a perfectly dpkg-buildpackage buildable checkout while
> svn doesn't
That's just a form of doing things and has nothing at all to do with
git vs. svn. Both git and svn can give you a perfectly dpkg-buildpackage
buildable checkout, or can't. See my irssi package in git, it won't give
you that: <http://git.debian.org/?p=users/alfie/irssi.git>
That's just what our current svn handling can give you. To be honest I
do consider switching wesnoth to git in the same way because its branch
handling is much more convenient and given that actually at times I am
working on 6 branches (unstable, experimental, lenny-backports and also
oldstable, stable (maintenance branches for security and serious stuff)
likewise oldstable-backports) I definitely can see where it could do its
goods. Especially since I started to consider and work on a posibility
to side-by-side install the upstream-stable version with upstream-devel
releases. I currently have a second svn checkout for the experimental
where I started to do some changes but those aren't finished yet and
given that branching in svn just isn't as easy I haven't commited my
efforts on that anywhere yet.
But just throwing around claims that git gives you a buildable checkout
while svn doesn't just is a blatant lie, there are counter-examples for
both sides of the story. I would even suggest that we could start to
facilitate the get-orig-source target and add some
make-debcheckout-debbuildable target in addition. That most probably
would help quite a lot of people, also some from other areas and take
some wind out of the sails.
So long!
Rhonda
P.S.: <philosophical>hmm, is taking out the wind of the sails (german
phrase, not sure if it really translates that well) actually
something appreciated? I mean, I don't want to be stranded in open
sea...</philosophical>
Reply to: