From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Sep 19 14:56:32 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7D00E106566B for ; Wed, 19 Sep 2012 14:56:32 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from nomadlogic@gmail.com) Received: from mail-vb0-f54.google.com (mail-vb0-f54.google.com [209.85.212.54]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2FE6E8FC0C for ; Wed, 19 Sep 2012 14:56:31 +0000 (UTC) Received: by vbmv11 with SMTP id v11so1649548vbm.13 for ; Wed, 19 Sep 2012 07:56:31 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=iBC2Po3uPxmzG1G1cG+1iwXuQEeswPTPA86HrZyjKOY=; b=l1NZrP0QtIcjzLxO9VPwUmADdQFubDn67uXRux2XFuv1RaNvN97NlLdOqnhWJeavWQ L3n1aQkDWwt9gZXmgOp8zRM51W39yYwU/DecuxXzXIBiOVrMzfL+Yu4dghdFugJX/mpl veVPJN7/zx6ACGlPMGXkWAJ4wH7lragz1KGHx/5Xu2IaETe9S4U7zDxvRObXrTh2HsTT CSF6Sl89X7NCveCD1Pzqp1FyZnpb381+SIlqUQ/RU8vTduBE6iQ9OyFT+7GxaSylSWm4 VNoK43ktyWtR1pVOXZXccr95MNcQRYocNHr/I/fL11wFBz371OQ/ohcmeU6GjiAvyLGj qVfQ== MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.52.33.130 with SMTP id r2mr1643753vdi.43.1348066591505; Wed, 19 Sep 2012 07:56:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.58.203.4 with HTTP; Wed, 19 Sep 2012 07:56:31 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <21e99057b51b3078055dc9f2626bd0bc@homey.local> References: <780066C6E2FAB67A997876B7@Pauls-MacBook-Pro.local> <20567.50041.903201.979498@jerusalem.litteratus.org> <75ca1e92e2a51857615e193434898bf5@homey.local> <20120918081624.173ea6e1@scorpio> <21e99057b51b3078055dc9f2626bd0bc@homey.local> Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2012 07:56:31 -0700 Message-ID: From: pete wright To: Stas Verberkt Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: What replaces csup? X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2012 14:56:32 -0000 On Tue, Sep 18, 2012 at 5:44 AM, Stas Verberkt wrot= e: > Jerry schreef op : > >> On Tue, 18 Sep 2012 05:00:08 -0700 >> Michael Sierchio articulated: >> >>> We are really behind the curve here. Git assumes (correctly) that >>> disk space is inexpensive, much cheaper per byte than network >>> bandwidth. By the time we adopt SVN completely, every serious project >>> I know of will have moved from subversion to git. >> >> >> If you are going to make a sweeping change anyway, it makes no sense to >> do it in a half=96assed manned. However, it does appear that in all too >> many instances, FreeBSD plays follow the leader rather then taking the >> bulls by the horns and getting ahead of the curve. I am sure I'll be >> hearing from the "baby steps" choir now. In any event, a comprehensive >> side-by-side evaluation of the two should be done by an impartial party. >> > We should not be forgetting that Git and Subversion represent two differe= nt > workflows. The latter stands for a centralistic development cycle, and th= e > former for a distributed manner. Thus, this type of choice does not reall= y > have to do with big or small steps and leading of following, but more abo= ut > the production cycle you want to have. > If we were to use a Git-like system, the releng team would (probably) be = in > control on which patches are excepted from the pool of suggested changese= ts > by the community of developers. This community would be more free in the > manner in which they experiment, and there would be a less strong > differentiation between "committers" and other people suggesting updates.= On > the other hand, our current approach has a controlled group of committers > and the releng team only has the additional power of setting the schedule > and taking the snapshot that becomes the release. (Gravely simplified.) > It is a matter of taste. > +1 one thing worth noting is that developers have been using mercurial for quite a bit of time now for FreeBSD development(1), to take advantage of the distributed model of that SCM. yet having the main tree under CVS in the past, and SVN currently, makes sense to me. i feel that it results in a cleaner public tree that is easier to navigate. so fortunately the project has been able to take advantage of both of of these philosophies of SCM. -pete (1) http://wiki.freebsd.org/LocalMercurial --=20 pete wright www.nycbug.org @nomadlogicLA