Re: [Fwd: Re: What's in git.git]

From: Jon Smirl <jonsmirl@gmail.com>
Date: Nov 19, 2006, 17:40 UTC
Message-ID: <9e4733910611190940y147992b8mbdfac5a51f42e0fe@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <20061119171135.GA13054@spearce.org>

On 11/19/06, Shawn Pearce <spearce@spearce.org> wrote:

> Have you been watching the shallow clone threads?

Some friends of mine are doing a start up that is sort of like a Sonos system but with some major differences. I've been helping them out so I've been doing chip design and PCB layouts lately. The system also needs some really complicated real-time, wireless mesh routing software, I wish the OLPC 802.11s code was ready.

Brendan told me that he would not consider Mozilla moving to git until a native Windows version is released so I just dropped the whole thing. It is too much effort and they don't even really want it. They are probably going to switch to SVN. I told him that SVN would end up being a disaster and he got mad at me. That's when I stopped working on cvs2svn/git.

The shallow clone work is being done in the wrong order to get the Mozilla people interested. #1) There needs to be a tool that can accurately import the repository. cvs2svn does not do this. The good programmers working on git could probably whip this out in a week or two if they wanted to. cvs2svn is very close but they refuse to solve the symbol dependency problem. #2) git needs native Windows support, this probably includes MSVC integration. There are a lot of non-technical people working on Mozilla like accessibility, doc, artwork, translations, they are all on Windows. Brendan explicitly ruled out cygwIn. #3) Once #1 and #2 are achieved then they will care about shallow clone.

The only way I can see Mozilla moving to git is if the git community ports the repository for them and then demonstrates that all of the needed tools and available and working.

Show 48 quoted lines

> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de>
> To: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
> Date: Sun, 19 Nov 2006 16:17:17 +0100 (CET)
> Subject: Re: What's in git.git
> Hi,
>
> On Sat, 18 Nov 2006, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>
> > Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net> writes:
> >
> > >  - 'pu' has the shallow clone WIP and a half-finished rewrite of
> > >    git branch in C, both by Johannes.  Both needs a bit more
> > >    polishing and confidence building before going into 'next',
> > >    and given the recent discussion of enhancing branch
> > >    management for pulls/pushes, it might be easier to drop the
> > >    latter for now.
> >
> > OOPS; sorry but the latter half is entirely untrue.  What's
> > there is half-done git-shortlog.  Scratch everything about
> > branch management please.
>
> IMHO -shortlog needs support to read .mailmap, and maybe nods to throw out
> the built-in mailmap which is totally specific to the Linux kernel
> development.
>
> As for shallow clone support: I am a bit underwhelmed by the enthusiasm
> to test this thing by the people I thought would be most interested. It
> really could be the case that it is not needed at all.
>
> Just for the record, though: AFAICT the shallow stuff is lacking support
> for at least pushing from/into shallow repos and it should avoid making a
> commit shallow unnecessarily. And quite likely there are a few thinkos in
> it, so it would not hurt having more test cases (notably of things I did
> not think of), and some bad-ass testing with huge amounts of commits and
> files which were added/modified identically in different commits.
>
> Ciao,
> Dscho
>
>
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>
>
>

-- 
Jon Smirl