From owner-freebsd-current@freebsd.org Sat Sep 19 05:31:43 2020 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EFDF73FB2C5 for ; Sat, 19 Sep 2020 05:31:43 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from zbeeble@gmail.com) Received: from mail-ed1-x52f.google.com (mail-ed1-x52f.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::52f]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256 client-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "GTS CA 1O1" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4BtfTC19rTz4cDN; Sat, 19 Sep 2020 05:31:42 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from zbeeble@gmail.com) Received: by mail-ed1-x52f.google.com with SMTP id n13so7973603edo.10; Fri, 18 Sep 2020 22:31:42 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=ZDiokWqMTNbJWISeMj4zTxD7FbbWNfboN0UPjkmP0OU=; b=dXVEU0dQflqZGRG8euDLR8iF5TwvjkfGrvSsGc4sYVlxtGbpGmzsS3e7wrHoEL2D7k 68m6Q6ytp4BKgoE8dbE3UxtAF6pc0nYk24DXr9d+UWJQyQ3ScTpiG7FoC4Z6wd+SMDsW lMdGnEkoMJcN5X2c1uZaX+cPIYtZ3BkZT78+Q8jwW/Kb/8MWUClRNCQyGGr1JCTnsg/z Lfju9Q9Ks2Yp1hzHbjsDl4P0MNSuYdxDsCCB1RDnz1yR5RBHjUpQ2BJh0HY7RcLcA2b1 daBrwnwiMcV1QxHSpKSAO2ZMBdrD0XfSkTrtygW0ZqRSPIESUAZE0Seuj4webV7uANvF mcUw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM53381+z+uxouPchzgqQ+f1jEn3yiYv3mjfK1MhgJKV789a6IWlDo UhadnhEwp//CrnDeeGp6geIgGeYf9A3qahH593/xysY= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwrxPEahYljR/8USKS2F7lzXg41CgtrUZs4h5Z49XWXi3fao77xzYMVC2fDlP4KtEvEI1t+vQ2LQbXhs3aSn0M= X-Received: by 2002:aa7:ca4f:: with SMTP id j15mr38613447edt.233.1600493500774; Fri, 18 Sep 2020 22:31:40 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20200902045939.GA15897@eureka.lemis.com> <20200902060117.GG53210@home.opsec.eu> <20200902063136.GA47543@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> <20200902164706.GA49777@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> <5c89b4d27281f5dfffc3252a90013b0ac6c763d7.camel@freebsd.org> <5c832482-b2bc-47e4-8762-8f5a886d5f11@www.fastmail.com> <68585ca4-5ca4-40d3-b2f4-67ff3b35b6ae@www.fastmail.com> <0be2ae57d1c58e2091f4cc4484731df0@bsdforge.com> <967D73EA-880E-413D-B748-62A406C46524@FreeBSD.org> <9f89dc553e7d7b0884c2862329bdfeae@bsdforge.com> In-Reply-To: From: Zaphod Beeblebrox Date: Sat, 19 Sep 2020 01:31:28 -0400 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Plans for git To: Warner Losh Cc: Chris , Kristof Provost , FreeBSD Current X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 4BtfTC19rTz4cDN X-Spamd-Bar: --- X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-3.46 / 15.00]; RCVD_TLS_ALL(0.00)[]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; R_DKIM_ALLOW(-0.20)[gmail.com:s=20161025]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-0.99)[-0.993]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; RCPT_COUNT_THREE(0.00)[4]; FREEMAIL_FROM(0.00)[gmail.com]; R_SPF_ALLOW(-0.20)[+ip6:2a00:1450:4000::/36]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[multipart/alternative,text/plain]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-1.05)[-1.050]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_SOME(0.00)[]; TO_DN_ALL(0.00)[]; DKIM_TRACE(0.00)[gmail.com:+]; DMARC_POLICY_ALLOW(-0.50)[gmail.com,none]; RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE(0.00)[2a00:1450:4864:20::52f:from]; NEURAL_HAM_SHORT(-0.42)[-0.419]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+,1:+,2:~]; FREEMAIL_ENVFROM(0.00)[gmail.com]; ASN(0.00)[asn:15169, ipnet:2a00:1450::/32, country:US]; RCVD_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2]; MAILMAN_DEST(0.00)[freebsd-current]; DWL_DNSWL_NONE(0.00)[gmail.com:dkim] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.33 X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.33 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 19 Sep 2020 05:31:44 -0000 Hrm. Maybe what I hear others saying, tho, and not entirely being replied to is just a nice concise document of the why. What I hear you saying is that GIT has momentum and that it's popular... (and I accept that --- it is evidently true), but then I hear handwaving about features, but no list of features that are a clear win/loose. Certainly the only clear things a quick search turns up that seem relevant is that GIT is GPL2.0 and SVN is Apache2.0. This was enough for LLVM vs GCC and the repository is a core function, but I suppose not a necessary function for forked projects that can't abide, so... Anyways... some concise record of thoughts might calm the gnawing sensation in my gut... On Thu, Sep 3, 2020 at 4:19 PM Warner Losh wrote: > On Thu, Sep 3, 2020 at 1:32 PM Chris wrote: > > > On 2020-09-03 11:33, Kristof Provost wrote: > > > On 3 Sep 2020, at 19:56, Chris wrote: > > >> Why was the intention to switch NOT announced as such MUCH sooner? > > >> > > > There was discussion about a possible switch to git on the freebsd-git > > > mailing > > > list as early as February 2017: > > > > > > https://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-git/2017-February/000092.html > > > > > > Ed gave a talk about FreeBSD and git back in 2018: > > > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G8wQ88d85s4 > > > > > > The Git Transition Working group was mentioned in the quarterly status > > > reports a > > > year ago: > > https://www.freebsd.org/news/status/report-2019-07-2019-09.html > > > and > > > https://www.freebsd.org/news/status/report-2019-04-2019-06.html > > It appears to me that the references you make here all allude to > > _investigation_ > > of a _possibility_ as opposed to a _likelihood_, or an _inevitable_. > > IMHO a change as significant as this, which will require tossing years of > > tooling > > out the window, and an untold amount of _re_tooling. Should have created > an > > announcement at _least_ as significant as a new release gets on the > mailing > > lists. > > > > Yes. We've been working on this for years. We've been working on the > retooling in earnest for the last 6 months. We didn't make an announcement > because we wanted to have most of the pieces in place before we did that. > We've been doing the multi-year process for multiple years now. I'll also > point out that only the 'git' people showed. A number of other ideas were > suggested, but nothing else was stood up in a serious way (hg came the > closest to setting up an exporter). Since there was really no alternatives > being proposed to git, the process was less visible than if we'd had to > have had a hg vs git bake off. One step has lead to the next, with much > status reporting done for years. > > Subversion, btw, is not viable in the long run. The Apache foundation has > moved all its projects from svn to git. The velocity of features with svn > has diminished, and the number of CI/CT/etc tool sets that supported svn > well has been dropping over time. It's also been identified as a barrier to > entry for the project. Sure, some people climb the learning curve to learn > and understand it, but our survey data has shown that for every one that > did take the time, many others did not and simply didn't contribute. > > All of these issues have been discussed at length at conferences for the > last 5 years at least, with increasing levels of sophistication. Had there > been a BSDcan this year, I'd hoped to do a talk / BOF on this to help > socialize the ideas and to get people's feedback in real time (rather than > the slow and difficult process of getting it just in email). > > We've also talked about this in the BSD office hours and core election > forums over the past year. > > We've been rolling out the beta git repo now for 3 months. People have > found issues and we've been correcting them. We've heard from people that > their automated tooling needs a bit of transition time, so we'll be > exporting the stable/11 and stable/12 branches back into subversion (and > the release branches) after the conversion for the life of those > branches, though we don't plan on doing it for the current nor stable/13 > branches (due to the inefficiencies of git-svn, we need separate trees for > each, and each tree takes over a day to setup). We know we need some better > docs (we have some decent preliminary ones, but there's some missing bits > in them, and they are too long for more casual users). We need to spell out > different commit policies, how we're going to have to shift our "MFC" > terminology because that's very CVS/SVN centric (in git a merge means a > more specific thing than it does in svn. A cherry-pick in git is also > called a merge in svn, for example). We need to document to the developers > how to make the shift (this doc is mostly complete and was posted earlier, > though it could use some TLC). We'd hoped to have the documents done, the > policies written and vetted and have a good test system before making an > announcement. The last thing I wanted was to make a big announcement, only > to fail to deliver. And since each step of the process followed naturally, > there wasn't a clear A/B decision point where an announcement could have > been generated. We were getting close to publishing the final schedule when > this thread popped up, though, since it is finally feeling like it will be > real soon. I also had hoped to refine things so that existing developers > and users would have only minor disruption at the cut over because things > were well documented. > > And once we have all the basics of phase 1 (which is just going to be 'do > FreeBSD's current workflow in git, making minimal changes initially), we'll > start on the refinements to the workflow that will help improve the quality > of code, make it easier to integrate changes, etc. There's quite the > diversity of views and opinions in the larger open source world on what > best practices are here, with different projects doing different things. It > will take some time for the project to adopt these new tools, new work > flows and realize that in some cases a diversity of tools can be an > advantage rather than a liability. This may be especially true as the needs > of the ports tree differ from the needs of the src tree and what's optimal > for one may not work too well for the other. > > So a lot of my reaction in the past few days has been frustration that this > came up about a week before we had all our ducks in a row to talk about it > effectively and talk about the transition plans. I apologize for being so > snarky about it. > > Warner > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list > https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" >