Re: [boost] Losing history (Was: [git] Boost.Build location_

Subject: Re: [boost] Losing history (Was: [git] Boost.Build location_
From: Dave Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2012-12-29 15:23:48

on Fri Dec 28 2012, Vladimir Prus <ghost-AT-cs.msu.su> wrote:

> On 28.12.2012 18:32, Dave Abrahams wrote:
>>
>> on Fri Dec 28 2012, Larry Evans <cppljevans-AT-suddenlink.net> wrote:
>>
>>> On 12/28/12 07:21, Dave Abrahams wrote:
>>>> Olaf van der Spek <ml <at> vdspek.org> writes:
>
>>>>
>>>>> Can't we first move to Git and only afterwards modularize things?
>>>>
>>>> We could have decided to do that, but we didn't, and I think we made
>>>> the right decision
>>>>
>>> Could you please explain a bit more why it was the right decision?
>>
>> 1. I believe that in this case, two disruptions are more disruptive than
>>     one.
>>
>> 2. I believe that without modularization, the move to Git does not
>>     sufficiently decouple development of individual libraries to be a win
>>     for Boost.
>>
>> 3. We're ready now; we have considered all the decisions for years and
>>     we believe the plan is solid.
>>
>> 4. Personally, my availability to work on this is likely to get much
>>     smaller soon.  If we don't get this done now, the modularization
>>     parts (which I consider paramount) might never get done.
>
> Dave,
>
> Those last two points seem weak to me.

You're entitled to that opinion.  I was merely answering Larry's
question about the source of my opinion.

> - It really does not matter how much calendar time you've spent on
> this, if the proposed plan raises concerns
>
> - Rushing a solution that has concerns just because you'll be out of
> time tomorrow, or because there's some other deadline, simply creates
> technical debt, which presumably you expect to be paid by others - if
> only in terms of extra dancing around necessary when "git blame" fails
> to report anything meaningful.
>
> From a user point of view, I don't see what's wrong with having each
> module contain changes to its original content adjust for directory
> layout change.

Only that it isn't an entirely accurate picture of history.  It might
still be better than the alternative, though.

-- 
Dave Abrahams
BoostPro Computing                  Software Development        Training
http://www.boostpro.com             Clang/LLVM/EDG Compilers  C++  Boost