[llvm-dev] RFC: Deleting git-svn folder (git-llvm, git-svnrevert, git-svnup)
Johannes Doerfert via llvm-dev
llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
Fri May 15 16:10:03 PDT 2020
Hi Zola,
thanks for the response.
People brought forth reasons why we should not have git scripts in the repo.
I'm not sure about that but as long as we don't see other people coming
forward,
we don't need it in the repo. I can have a private copy after all.
Thanks again,
Johannes
On 5/15/20 2:16 PM, Zola Bridges via llvm-dev wrote:
> Hey everyone,
>
> I missed the discussion on this thread after I submitted the patch, so I'm
> chiming in a bit late.
>
> I'm totally okay if folks want to add git-llvm back to the repo. (It sounds
> like the other scripts, git-svnup, git-revertsvn can remain deleted.
> Correct me if I'm wrong there.)
>
> My understanding was that the scripts were primarily a tool used during the
> git-svn migration and thus were no longer useful and so the reason to
> delete them would be to get rid of unused code/scripts. An earlier
> discussion on improving the tool ended with folks suggesting it wasn't
> useful to add functionality to it since it was a workflow that we
> were moving away from and I later found that references to git-llvm in the
> documentation had been removed, so those are other reasons I had the
> impression it was basically dead code.
>
> I didn't consider that other folks would still be using git-llvm in their
> personal workflows which, in hindsight, I should have. Sorry about that!
>
> The last reason the delete happened was that there were no objections until
> after the patch was submitted. :) I'll chalk that up to it being difficult
> to keep up with llvm-dev since it's very active. I've missed threads I
> meant to contribute to in the past.
>
> If folks want to add this back to the repo, I'm not opposed.
>
> Zola Bridges
>
>
> On Wed, May 13, 2020 at 1:49 AM James Henderson via llvm-dev <
> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>
>> FWIW, I'm not against people using the script if there's a good reason for
>> it, but I'd be somewhat opposed to mandating it, as that could easily get
>> confusing for people like me who work in both downstream and upstream repos
>> who wouldn't want to use the scripts downstream - it would be fairly
>> straightforward to forget to use it/use it incorrectly, and depending on
>> what the script actually does, this could cause various unwanted side
>> effects, which may not even be noticed immediately.
>>
>> On Tue, 12 May 2020 at 23:30, Eric Christopher via llvm-dev <
>> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>>
>>> I think the only reason is whether or not we want to encourage anything
>>> as part of them or whether we want "llvm specific" commit
>>> advice/instructions/etc where we want people to use these for sure.
>>>
>>> That said, git isn't the most command line friendly of VCSs for me so if
>>> we want to have something that makes things just a little easier I'm down,
>>> but would like to see what we expect them to do documented (here?) and ...
>>> documented (on the web page).
>>>
>>> Thoughts?
>>>
>>> -eric
>>>
>>> On Tue, May 12, 2020 at 3:25 PM Johannes Doerfert <
>>> johannesdoerfert at gmail.com> 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?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 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
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20200515/854be4a6/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the llvm-dev
mailing list