[phobos] Switching to git

[Sean Kelly]

I like Git in theory but I'd prefer people simply be responsible when  
making changes then put myself in the position of integrator. We're  
all overworked as it is.

That said, the Git model works well for having a staging area where a  
build occurs and unit tests are run automatically for each commit  
before puishing to the central repo. I've used this model at work in  
the past and it's great, though a lot of setup is involved.

Sent from my iPhone

On May 26, 2010, at 2:19 AM, Lars Tandle Kyllingstad  
<lars at kyllingen.net> wrote:

> Was: Re: [phobos] phobos commit, revision 1553
>
>
> On Tue, 2010-05-25 at 09:32 -0500, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
>> I'd vote one up for git, but it won't fix the builds for us.
>
>
> No, but it would have prevented the problems in the first place,  
> because
> people wouldn't commit their changes directly to 'trunk'.
>
> When several people make several changes to the same codebase, it  
> can be
> hard to track down exactly which change caused an error.  In a project
> like Phobos, where there is a lot of interdependence between  
> modules, it
> may even happen that an error is caused by a combination of different
> changes made by different people.
>
> And even when an error is tracked down, it may not be a trivial
> operation to remove the bad code again if there have been a lot of
> changes to trunk after the code was committed.
>
> I'm guessing this hasn't been a problem so far due to the relatively  
> low
> number of Phobos developers.  But this seems to be changing now.
>
> Like Steve points out, it would be possible to use branches and  
> merging
> when making changes.  There are some problems with this, though:
>
>     1. dsource's ancient SVN server is terribly bad at merging.
>     2. The branches/ directory would quickly become an unwieldly mess
>        if a new branch is created for every little change.
>     3. SVN doesn't really seem to be designed with such a  
> decentralised
>        coding model in mind.
>
> git, on the other hand, is made for exactly this purpose.
>
> With git, if I make a change to Phobos, I tell you guys: "Hey folks,
> please pull this code from my repo and test it."  If there are no
> problems with it, only then may it be included in the next release.   
> At
> no point do I commit anything to trunk and say: "Hey folks, I've
> *already* uploaded some not-completely-tested-nor-reviewed change to  
> our
> single, common codebase.  It may break stuff for everyone in ways I
> hadn't thought of, but hey, there's only one way to find out."
>
> Here are some more links for the curious:
>
>        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ 
> Distributed_revision_control_system
>        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Git_%28software%29
>
> -Lars
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> phobos mailing list
> phobos at puremagic.com
> http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/phobos