Re: [boost] [git] Mercurial?

Subject: Re: [boost] [git] Mercurial?
From: Stephan Menzel (stephan.menzel_at_[hidden])
Date: 2012-03-27 05:58:33

Joel,

On Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 10:52 AM, Joel de Guzman
<joel_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> [snip anti-git rant]

I think I was being misunderstood. I am indeed a great fan and didn't
want to rant against git. I just came to accept that as long as
there's sentiment there's no transition possible.

> Ok, I open my challenge to you and any Git/Hg fans.
>
> Again, all I want is to:
>
> 1) Extract this modular repo structure from Boost:
>
> Â  spirit
> Â  Â  boost
> Â  Â  Â  spirit
> Â  Â  libs
> Â  Â  Â  spirit

Easily doable

> 2) that can merge both ways (upstream and downstream
> to and from the boost SVN trunk); needless to say, with all
> the histories intact.

Not at all doable. As I said, one may be able to hack this or make it
work but it's not a defined or supported way of working with it. And
using such a system in a way that defies its intended way of being
used is pointless and will only support those who claim git itself is
not a good thing.
Sure, you may be able to cut your fingernails with a chainsaw but life
is just better and a little safer if you don't do it and it adds to
the chainsaw's reputation to a way that it doesn't deserve.

> If anyone can do this and offer a way that's **actually tested**,
> I'm all ears. Emphasis: I don't want to waste any more time
> following dead ends! I want a procedure that's actually tested
> with the Boost repo and the Spirit library in particular
> (using git-svn or whatnot).
>
> Better yet, if someone can actually put the modular repo
> somewhere (github, gitorious), with specific and sane usage
> instructions, then I'd immediately use that.

git-svn specifically mentions that usage as being not supported. Two
way svn syncs with changes on both ends are a no-go. I have tried that
in the past and it didn't work out. Which means: Challenge not
accepted! ;-)
I have substantial experience with transistions like that in several
projects in my past and I have the strong opinion that either you do
it right or you don't do it at all. Any compromise along the git-svn
lines except an initial export is bogus.

As I said, it would have been nice, but existing sentiment forbids
chasing that any further. The boost community should just accept this
as consens and be done with it.

Cheers,
Stephan