Subject: Re: [boost] [git] neglected aspects
From: Olaf van der Spek (ml_at_[hidden])
Date: 2012-02-11 11:46:16
On Sat, Feb 11, 2012 at 3:38 PM, Julien Nitard <julien.nitard_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> The level of wrongness in this email (at least the quoted part above)
> is such that it is hard for me to keep calm. I am, admittedly, biased
> toward SVN. I can accept that DCVS systems like git may improve the
> workflow on projects like boost, but you're twisting facts. I am
> currently wondering whether you did that on purpose or not.
> Sorry if this was too strong, I am not perfect myself and make
> mistakes too. I would like to keep the discussion in a cordial tone
> if possible.
Let's discuss a concrete case. Someone without write access to the SVN
repo wants to contribute somde code.
2. Edit code
3. Can't commit, so can't do any kind of local checkpoints
4. Can't push, so has to generate a patch
5. Upload patch to Trac (slow, requires browser, no tool support)
Someone else wants to check out this patch
6. Download patch from Trac (slow, requires browser, no tool support)
7. Apply patch
DVCS would allow local commits (with commit messages), handy for larger patches
DVCS would support publishing and retrieving these patches
To me, these are clear and useful advantages.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk