[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 16:31:59 PDT 2020
On 5/12/20 5:40 PM, Tom Stellard wrote:
> On 05/12/2020 03:23 PM, Johannes Doerfert via llvm-dev wrote:
>> 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?
>>
> The reason I am in favor of removing this script is that it avoids the
> problem where people report problems with their local git configuration
> as bugs in the script.
I see. I did not expect that was happening.
I was hoping it would allow us to solve common problems, .e.g., what we
learn form the threads asking how to deal with git directly.
I also thought, the script would give us also a nice way forward once we
change our workflow again (without requiring everyone to do it manually).
Cheers,
Johannes
> -Tom
>> 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
>>>> >>
>>>> >
>>>>
>>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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