Re: Switching to git
On Sunday, March 06, 2011 03:02:25 pm Yaroslav Halchenko wrote:
> On Sun, 06 Mar 2011, Scott Kitterman wrote:
> > One thing that is a clear advantage for bzr is that it supports both a
> > traditional centralized workflow and modern DVCS workflow so that not
> > everyone needs to switch to a foreign method of work immediately after
> > the transition.
>
> AFAIK any DVCS could be used in a 'centralized' fashion -- just choose
> the central repository everyone should use for their pushes (e.g. like
> we would already have for team maintained packaging). Moreover git
> provides git cvsserver, so hard-core CVS users do not even need to
> switch away from CVS client.
>
> Personally, bzr always gave me creeps, and I never managed to get peace
> with HG (probably problem is in me, not in GIT). And despite being
> pro-Python myself, I hated all those tracebacks I received from HG and
> bzr -- most of the time they were close to useless for me as the user.
With bzr the transition from svn is a little easier than that. Almost any svn
command you would use, the same command works with bzr, e.g. svn co and bzr
co.
Since we're using svn, I don't think cvs clients are particulalry relevant.
I find bzr to be very reliable in the projects I use it on (where people are
using Debian, Ubuntu and some *bsd variants). It also seems it's learning
curve is less steep than git's. While that's less of an issue for attracting
contributors who are already active in Debian since git is widely used in the
project, it is an issue for bringing in new contributors.
I think a bigger issue for the team to reach consensus on than which $DVCS to
use is the repository format. With a $DVCS will be still just keep the
packaging in the team repository or will we move to full source code +
packaging repositories?
Scott K
P.S. No need to cc me. I am subscribed to the list.
Reply to: