[lldb-dev] [llvm-dev] [cfe-dev] GitHub anyone?
Renato Golin via lldb-dev
lldb-dev at lists.llvm.org
Wed Jun 1 12:10:18 PDT 2016
On 1 June 2016 at 19:36, Aaron Ballman <aaron at aaronballman.com> wrote:
> Despite people's reservations of a git-only repository?
Hi Aaron, not at all!
I was especially vague on my first email to make sure SVN folks would
be shoved on the side, but John had asked for a full plan *in the case
we move*, and I was just completing the picture.
Having said that, I can't take that decision alone, and my own opinion
is irrelevant on the grand scheme.
Right now, our main repo is in SVN with most people using Git. If the
vast majority vote for the move, it wouldn't be fair to continue to
force SVN on them, and it would be overall less effort for the few
people that prefer SVN to have a bit more work than they have today,
to save the majority of Git users the extra work. I have no idea how
much people is enough to move to Git, but unless we fix the sub-module
problem, there's no point in even trying.
So, my personal points are:
1. We can only move IFF the Git solution is technically equivalent or
superior than what we have today.
2. We should only move IFF the vast majority will see benefits from
it, even if a small minority will see some increased effort. Of
course, the balance of efforts has to be overall positive.
3. We should not move if there is no replacement for SVN users at the
moment. We should try to encourage SVN users to move to Git, to speed
up the move, though.
I'm assuming the SVN vs. Git argument is not just a personal thing,
but a tooling / infrastructure issue. The bigger picture here is not
which VCS is better, but getting rid of a huge infrastructure cost
from our part, which nowadays means moving to Git or using
More information about the lldb-dev