[llvm-dev] [RFC] GitHub Survey - Please review

[Renato Golin via llvm-dev]

On 19 August 2016 at 23:57, Jonathan Roelofs <jonathan at codesourcery.com> wrote:
> Not sure if this has already been mentioned elsewhere, but I think there's
> another important aspect to this: a big change in workflow can make things
> better/worse/same , but measuring the size of change doesn't tell you
> whether that change is good or not. Both the effort required to change, and
> the desirability of the end state are important here.

This has been addressed early on by splitting short-term from long-term.

So, if you require a lot of changes, but overall this will be better
for you, the answer is "major impact short-term", "no impact
long-term".

You can interpret "no impact long term" as "it's would be a good
move", as the long term "git-svn" already has a costly long term
impact.

So, It seems that the common misunderstanding here is that "the
current cost is zero", but that's far from the truth, and it's the
major reason why we're trying to change.

I can add an extra answer to the long term like "it'll be better".

does that help?

--renato