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

Re: Git? (Was: Team maint update)

Ravi Nanavati wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 3, 2009 at 11:38 AM, John Goerzen<jgoerzen@complete.org> wrote:
>> I'm OK working with Darcs too.  I'm just volunteering to set up
>> infrastructure with Git.  :-)
> I should probably make clear that, on a personal level, I don't really
> care about darcs vs git. I personally use git and git-svn heavily at
> work. I'm just trying to think through what's the best long-run choice
> for Debian Haskell... and besides the potential upstream collaboration
> benefits, I seem to recall some people saying that it is easier to
> recruit *Haskell* developers if you use darcs (in some other context).

It's certainly true that darcs is represented well in the Haskell
community, but it's not a monoculture by any means.  There are still
several large projects using CVS.  I maintain 39 Haskell projects in Git
(though some of them aren't on Hackage or are now obsolete) myself.

There is better support in Debian for git.  pristine-tar supports it out
of the box.  git-buildpackage is more featureful than darcs-buildpackage
and is actively maintained.  git also is much stronger than Darcs at
branching and merging, managing large projects, dealing with conflicts,
etc.  It has submodule support, which means we can view a logical big
project, or individual subprojects.  (darcs would have no way of dealing
with a logical big repo, and wouldn't scale to that anyhow.)

Personally I am unconvinced of the merits of a monolithic (whether
literally or logically) repo, when a simple shell script with "for"
could suffice.

Anyhow, my proposal is this: I'm willing to set up some Git
infrastructure for us to use.  I know it well enough to do that
reasonably quickly.  If the group prefers Darcs, that's fine; I'll use
it, but I'm not going to volunteer to set up infrastructure for it
because I don't have time to do that.

-- John

Reply to: