Mailing List Archive

GIT vs? SVN (was: Re: Re: [RFC] Some sync control)
So to avoid thread hijacking, starting a new one.

I did some tests today and took sunrise overlay as testing ground.
It has roughly 2850 revisions. As a blog recommended, I fetched the raw
repo first to do the initial conversion to git.

Then all I did was a
git-svn init file:///home/jokey/sunrise-svn && git-svn fetch
It took 5 minutes and 12 secs for me on a not-so fast box. Then I had a
git repo that could do all the branching, file merging and stuff and it
sends it back to repo nicely. Even a reversion of a commit worked perfectly.

git log gave this output:
commit a8c35b8efe130fca7e2c3bb0d589a2d251f381c3
Author: ndansmith <ndansmith@12608f7e-a915-0410-b2f3-ce240db1b126>
Date: Thu Jan 25 03:35:02 2007 +0000

Removing old turl files in favor of surl

git-svn-id: file:///home/jokey/test/svn@2856
12608f7e-a915-0410-b2f3-ce240db1b126

So judging from this, I'd say we could use advantages of both. Those who
wish git can go for it (the git repo, as pointed out on this list, can
initially be fetched via rsync or tarballs or whatever comes in handy)
and those who dislike git can just go with svn and be happy with it.

Jokey

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: GIT vs? SVN (was: Re: Re: [RFC] Some sync control) [ In reply to ]
On Thu, 2007-01-25 at 23:37 +0100, Markus Ullmann wrote:
> So to avoid thread hijacking, starting a new one.

What exactly is this thread you are starting about? Just letting us know
you did some random testing?

>
> I did some tests today and took sunrise overlay as testing ground.
> It has roughly 2850 revisions. As a blog recommended, I fetched the raw
> repo first to do the initial conversion to git.
>
> Then all I did was a
> git-svn init file:///home/jokey/sunrise-svn && git-svn fetch
> It took 5 minutes and 12 secs for me on a not-so fast box. Then I had a
> git repo that could do all the branching, file merging and stuff and it
> sends it back to repo nicely. Even a reversion of a commit worked perfectly.
>
> git log gave this output:
> commit a8c35b8efe130fca7e2c3bb0d589a2d251f381c3
> Author: ndansmith <ndansmith@12608f7e-a915-0410-b2f3-ce240db1b126>
> Date: Thu Jan 25 03:35:02 2007 +0000
>
> Removing old turl files in favor of surl
>
> git-svn-id: file:///home/jokey/test/svn@2856
> 12608f7e-a915-0410-b2f3-ce240db1b126
>
> So judging from this, I'd say we could use advantages of both. Those who
> wish git can go for it (the git repo, as pointed out on this list, can
> initially be fetched via rsync or tarballs or whatever comes in handy)
> and those who dislike git can just go with svn and be happy with it.
>
> Jokey
>
--
Ned Ludd <solar@gentoo.org>
Gentoo Linux

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: GIT vs? SVN (was: Re: Re: [RFC] Some sync control) [ In reply to ]
Ned Ludd schrieb:
> On Thu, 2007-01-25 at 23:37 +0100, Markus Ullmann wrote:
>> So to avoid thread hijacking, starting a new one.
>
> What exactly is this thread you are starting about? Just letting us know
> you did some random testing?
>

More doing a test for a daily workflow and I'll continue it to see how
it works out.
I also hope to get some input on it from others. Maybe there are users /
devs out there with more experience and are willing to share it.

Jokey

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: GIT vs? SVN (was: Re: Re: [RFC] Some sync control) [ In reply to ]
Ned Ludd wrote:

> On Thu, 2007-01-25 at 23:37 +0100, Markus Ullmann wrote:
>> So to avoid thread hijacking, starting a new one.
>
> What exactly is this thread you are starting about? Just letting us know
> you did some random testing?
>
I think this is a reference to news:200701112229.58538.peper@gentoo.org
where I was asking about what would be a good distributed scm. Thanks for
testing jokey.

There was a massive thread on the git/bzr lists which marienz pointed out,
which has TBH given me a massive headache ;) The gist of what I read was
that both use UUIDs, but bzr leans towards local rev ids for styles of
development where full distribution is not required (ie star topographies.)
Additionally, bzr makes a new rev every time there is a merge, even if
nothing has changed.

I like the bzr approach of providing a framework, but I guess I'm still
leaning towards git, as I'm not really after a framework per se. So it's
good to know you can set up a repo which will commit to a svn parent.


--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list