[llvm-dev] RFC: Deleting git-svn folder (git-llvm, git-svnrevert, git-svnup)
Johannes Doerfert via llvm-dev
llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
Tue May 12 15:23:57 PDT 2020
For some reason this thread seems to be gone in a wrong direction. I'm
sorry for that.
The discussion on the RFC asked for a reason to keep the script, I think
we heard reasons to do so (due to branches).
Now, I was unable to determine if the `git llvm` scripts was removed
"just as part of the bunch" or if we expect a problem with the script.
If it is the former, are there reasons against adding it back?
Thanks,
Johannes
On 5/12/20 5:13 PM, David Blaikie wrote:
> On Tue, May 12, 2020 at 2:56 PM Johannes Doerfert <
> johannesdoerfert at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> TBH, all I initially asked for, still ask for, is a reason why `git
>> llvm` was being removed.
>
> Fair enough - and 24 hours later no one had replied to your inquiry - I
> don't think that's a huge deal, to be honest - I've certainly had to
> follow-up with higher email latencies than that pretty regularly. Eric had
> replied to someone else's question pretty reasonably "what do I use
> instead?" "git push" (what most people have been using since the transition)
>> Your email was the only one that hinted on a
>> reason.
>>
> I think the original proposal & response covered that - they seem(ed) like
> dead code ("My understanding of these tools is that they were useful for
> when we were migrating between Git and SVN, but now, since the migration is
> complete, they can be deleted as they are either unnecessary or there are
> other more common workflow options (ie git llvm push --> git push).") -
> some folks agreed, and time was given in case anyone had use cases they
> wanted to bring up & didn't.
>
>> (more below)
>>
>> On 5/12/20 4:00 PM, David Blaikie wrote:
>> > On Tue, May 12, 2020 at 1:50 PM Johannes Doerfert via llvm-dev <
>> > llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>> >
>> >> @Zola, Eric,
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> I really feel the communication and reasoning here is problematic.
>> >>
>> >> From my perspective, you removed stuff "we don't need", ignoring
>> whether
>> >> it is used, and then let people figure out how to deal with the result.
>> >>
>> >> What I most dislike about the process most is how questions and
>> concerns
>> >> are then ignored or played down.
>> >>
>> > Honestly, I think Zola did more than I'd have expected to be done for
>> this
>> > - sending out the proposal (to llvm-dev, not just llvm-commits, even) &
>> > waiting a week for feedback.
>>
>> Sure. That is why I did not mention the process that lead to the situation.
>> I think my email/questions are well in line with post-commit review
>> standards but people seem to disagree.
>>
> I don't think your first email was unreasonable/not sure anyone's saying it
> was unreasonable?
>
>
>>> Suggesting that LLVM developers (the, apparently rather small (based on
>> > feedback from before/after this change) number of them) migrate to the
>> > standard git functionality for contributing to git projects seems
>> like it's
>> > in line with discussions I recall seeing before and after the git
>> migration
>> > - that the git-llvm scripts were migration tools (there was some
>> discussion
>> > about whether they might be used for more post-migration, to enforce
>> > certain constraints, etc - but those ideas were not accepted/moved
>> forward
>> > with).
>>
>> I recall no decision being made back in October 2019 and that we will
>> see how it goes. Till now I thought it went fine, or at least I haven't
>> understood what needed fixing.
>>
> I think the migration went fine, yes - but these scripts seem to me like a
> vestige of the hybrid situation & no longer needed/especially beneficial.
>
>
>>> I have some concern about adding these scripts back in as they may
>> lead to
>> > greater divergence in developer experience and/or become less
>> relevant over
>> > time and a weird thing for newcomers to stumble over, perhaps. But I
>> don't
>> > feel /that/ strongly, if other folks particularly prefer using them,
>> they
>> > seem mostly harmless.
>>
>> I don't think I understand your concerns. Could you elaborate what
>> divergence you can see in the future? FWIW, if the scripts are broken
>> and people stumble over them it means no one takes care of them and
>> removal is adequate.
>>
> I'd generally prefer to remove things sooner rather than later, personally.
> I believe some of the original motivation was an offline discussion about
> adding more features (to trim unnecessary Phabricator fields, I believe) to
> them & a response was that they're not really used/encouraged & so adding
> features wouldn't be especially valuable - so the thought was to go the
> other way, rather than keeping them around, and building processes that
> might only work with the scripts & then being let down when those processes
> aren't adhered to by most of the community (because they're not using the
> scripts) it'd be better to remove them and standardize practices on the
> plain git tools.
>
> - Dave
>
>
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Johannes
>>
>>
>> > - Dave
>> >
>> >>
>> >> Thanks,
>> >>
>> >> Johannes
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On 5/12/20 2:10 PM, Keane, Erich via llvm-dev wrote:
>> >>
>> >> FWIW, if you do your development in git-branches, it is a little
>> more than that. IT ends up being:
>> >>
>> >> git push origin HEAD:master.
>> >>
>> >> Which is somewhat easy to mess up. For example, I inverted the
>> HEAD/master at one point and ended up creating a branch named “HEAD” at
>> one point.
>> >>
>> >> From: llvm-dev <llvm-dev-bounces at lists.llvm.org>
>> <llvm-dev-bounces at lists.llvm.org> On Behalf Of Eric Christopher via
>> llvm-dev
>> >> Sent: Tuesday, May 12, 2020 11:59 AM
>> >> To: Hiroshi Yamauchi <yamauchi at google.com> <yamauchi at google.com>
>> >> Cc: llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>
>> >> Subject: Re: [llvm-dev] RFC: Deleting git-svn folder (git-llvm,
>> git-svnrevert, git-svnup)
>> >>
>> >> Just push :)
>> >>
>> >> On Tue, May 12, 2020, 8:46 AM Hiroshi Yamauchi
>> <yamauchi at google.com<mailto:yamauchi at google.com> <yamauchi at google.com>>
>> wrote:
>> >> I was also using "git llvm push" to commit, sort of out of habit.
>> What's a recommended, alternative way to push?
>> >>
>> >> On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 11:57 AM Johannes Doerfert via llvm-dev
>> <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org<mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>
>> <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> I was actually using `git llvm` in my daily workflow.
>> >>
>> >> Could you explain why we want people to move away from that script?
>> >>
>> >> In addition to the convenience, it prevented me from accidentally
>> creating a new branch (which I did before with push once).
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Cheers,
>> >>
>> >> Johannes
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On 5/11/20 11:43 AM, Zola Bridges via llvm-dev wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Deleted this morning. Thanks!
>> >>
>> >> Zola Bridges
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 2:35 PM Eric Christopher <echristo at gmail.com>
>> <echristo at gmail.com><mailto:echristo at gmail.com> <echristo at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Giving at least one explicit:
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Sounds good to me.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 12:01 PM Zola Bridges via llvm-dev <
>> >> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org<mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>
>> <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Here is a link to the patch: https://reviews.llvm.org/D79348
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Zola Bridges
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 11:50 AM Zola Bridges <zbrid at google.com>
>> <zbrid at google.com><mailto:zbrid at google.com> <zbrid at google.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Hi everyone,
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> I would like to delete this folder of svn to git migration tools.
>> >> https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/tree/master/llvm/utils/git-svn
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> My understanding of these tools is that they were useful for when we
>> >>
>> >> were migrating between Git and SVN, but now, since the migration is
>> >>
>> >> complete, they can be deleted as they are either unnecessary or
>> there are
>> >>
>> >> other more common workflow options (ie git llvm push --> git push).
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> - Is there any reason these scripts should continue to exist that
>> >>
>> >> I'm not aware of?
>> >>
>> >> - I'd like to delete these next Monday. Is that timeline
>> >>
>> >> unacceptable to anyone?
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Thanks,
>> >>
>> >> Zola Bridges
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> _______________________________________________
>> >>
>> >> LLVM Developers mailing list
>> >> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org<mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>
>> <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>
>> >> https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> _______________________________________________
>> >>
>> >> LLVM Developers mailing list
>> >> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org<mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>
>> <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>
>> >> https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev
>> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> LLVM Developers mailing
>> listllvm-dev at lists.llvm.org<mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>
>> <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>
>> https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> LLVM Developers mailing
>> listllvm-dev at lists.llvm.orghttps://
>> lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev
>> >>
>> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> LLVM Developers mailing list
>> >> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
>> >> https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev
>> >>
>> >
>>
>>
More information about the llvm-dev
mailing list