<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html charset=utf-8"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;" class="">Owen, and many others …<div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">I do not wish to belabor this conversation as it distracts from everything else you all have to do. </div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">The fact that llvm does have a synchronized repository on github is sufficient for me. I can fork it, hack on it, and keep it up to date as needed. If a change I make is sufficiently useful, I’ll just submit a patch. </div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">The arguments about monotonically increasing revision number are, in my view, rather silly. That is not a very good reason for choosing or even staying with an SCM. There are stronger arguments for sticking with SVN.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">The arguments about having a single line of change is valid, but SVN isn’t the only tool that supports that model. I’m in support of this approach as I use it on all my projects, including those using GIT.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">I do understand that many automated processes are now built up around SVN and changing to git would be a huge effort with little to be gained.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">In putting out my inquiry, I was concerned more about LLVM being sequestered off in a corner of the Internet and not having its code as easily available as on, say, github. Code access and brows ability is one of the things that fosters innovation. However, I get that switching would be a huge pain and that LLVM is by now a mature project where perhaps innovation is taking a back seat to maintaining a standard development model that its many existing developers have grown accustomed to.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">So, let’s follow Owen’s suggestion and end the conversation about SCM choice and replace it with conversations about improving the development process. I for one will need to get back into that process before I can comment because it is clear that after 7 years, things just ain’t the same. :)</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Best,</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Reid.</div><div class=""><br class=""><div><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class="">On Jan 16, 2015, at 6:40 AM, Owen Anderson <<a href="mailto:resistor@mac.com" class="">resistor@mac.com</a>> wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><div class=""><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html charset=utf-8" class=""><div style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;" class=""><br class=""><div class=""><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class="">On Jan 16, 2015, at 3:26 AM, Erik de Castro Lopo <<a href="mailto:mle+cl@mega-nerd.com" class="">mle+cl@mega-nerd.com</a>> wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><div class=""><span style="font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; float: none; display: inline !important;" class="">As for all the reason why the LLVM project does not use Git, I wonder</span><br style="font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px;" class=""><span style="font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; float: none; display: inline !important;" class="">why large complex projects like the Linux kernel, Wine, MinGW-w64,</span><br style="font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px;" class=""><span style="font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; float: none; display: inline !important;" class="">GHC and many many others don't seem to have any major problems using</span><br style="font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px;" class=""><span style="font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; float: none; display: inline !important;" class="">Git.</span></div></blockquote></div><br class=""><div class="">Lots of projects are also happy with Mercurial, or BZR, or even CVS.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Every open source community has its own established workflows by which developers interact with and ultimately contribute to the mainline repository. Those workflows, and the common use cases that lead to them, strongly impact what specific SCM arrangements will or will not work.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">To take the Linux kernel as an example, they use a very different integration strategy from LLVM that is predicated on having a significant hierarchy of developers whose major roles are to act as integrators for incoming patches. Obviously they use (and built!) an SCM tool that supports their workflow.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">LLVM does *not* use such a workflow. The outcome of several iterations of this discussion on this list has been that, for the LLVM community’s workflow, the advantages of moving mainline to git have not been seen as substantial versus our current arrangement, and it will lose some features that are useful.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Any re-opening of this discussion needs to address the fundamental question of how switching mainline to git will actively help the LLVM community’s development process, and whether those benefits will outweigh the downsides.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">—Owen</div></div>_______________________________________________<br class="">LLVM Developers mailing list<br class=""><a href="mailto:LLVMdev@cs.uiuc.edu" class="">LLVMdev@cs.uiuc.edu</a> <a href="http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu" class="">http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu</a><br class=""><a href="http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev" class="">http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev</a><br class=""></div></blockquote></div><br class=""></div></body></html>