I would like to avoid git at all costs, even if it means I have to host something non-git as main repo myself and pay for the hosting. Cloning git into a local svn on my side is not an option because it combines the worst usability aspects of git hosting (no version numbers) and svn clients (no offline commits).
If there really is a large demand for a non-svn hosting, I would be open to using mercurial (as master) because it at least has some sort of usability and can provide (conceptually limited) version numbers. I have worked for a few years with mercurial and the version numbers are extremely helpful even if they are per-branch and only semi-stable.
About jenkins: Seems to be a good idea and would help detect patch bitrot.
About gerrit: Last time I tried gerrit the usability was horrible: - needs registration (like a forum) - has no usable mail interface (like a forum) - you can't work on drafts for a review unless you keep the web browser window open (like a forum) If we really want to move to gerrit, we should close the mailing list as well and switch to a forum which has roughly the same usability as gerrit. I really mean it. We seriously should consider moving to a forum _if_ developers prefer forum interfaces to mail.
Regards, Carl-Daniel
On 07.08.2015 20:51, David Hendricks wrote:
For those who missed it on IRC, Stefan (Reinauer) has proposed retiring SVN and patch work in favor of Git and (likely) Gerrit + Jenkins. Maintaining SVN and Patchwork represents a surprisingly large maintenance burden on top of Git and Gerrit that coreboot uses. Additionally, many in the community work around SVN's limitations by mirroring the project at places like Github anyway.
Stefan put up a Doodle poll here to hear out comments/concerns: http://doodle.com/p2dxtnksmsgwmzrq
-- David Hendricks (dhendrix) Systems Software Engineer, Google Inc.
flashrom mailing list flashrom@flashrom.org http://www.flashrom.org/mailman/listinfo/flashrom
<
2015-08-08 10:23 GMT+02:00 Carl-Daniel Hailfinger < c-d.hailfinger.devel.2006@gmx.net>:
If there really is a large demand for a non-svn hosting, I would be open to using mercurial (as master) because it at least has some sort of usability and can provide (conceptually limited) version numbers. I have worked for a few years with mercurial and the version numbers are extremely helpful even if they are per-branch and only semi-stable.
mercurial's notion of a monotonic commit counter (that you're looking for if I understand you correctly) has about the same quality as git describe's commits-since-last-tag counter.
For a global numbering scheme, you could just (automatically) tag every single commit of a certain branch (master, release, ...) with a monotonic counter. That's more or less what the svn-to-git translation of tianocore is doing, for example (with tags following the scheme svn18670). That way, those numbers are actually global, unlike what mercurial is doing. Assume that the scheme is to use $version-$number since release: git describe would emit something like 0.9.9-40-5-gabcde, meaning that your tree is based on the tag 0.9.9-40 (globally unique), is 5 local commits away from that, with your current local commit id being abcde.
Patrick
On Sat, Aug 8, 2015 at 1:23 AM, Carl-Daniel Hailfinger c-d.hailfinger.devel.2006@gmx.net wrote:
I would like to avoid git at all costs, even if it means I have to host something non-git as main repo myself and pay for the hosting. Cloning git into a local svn on my side is not an option because it combines the worst usability aspects of git hosting (no version numbers) and svn clients (no offline commits).
+1 to what Patrick said, too.
If there really is a large demand for a non-svn hosting,
AFAICT many active developers already work with flashrom repositories in git (mirrored or not). They're just doing the reverse of what you describe, importing the SVN repository into git, to workaround the usability aspects of SVN.
I would be open to using mercurial (as master) because it at least has some sort of usability and can provide (conceptually limited) version numbers. I have worked for a few years with mercurial and the version numbers are extremely helpful even if they are per-branch and only semi-stable.
The point of this is that maintaining two different SCMs and code review systems is a pain. Just keeping SVN up-to-date requires dealing with several (maybe dozens?) extra packages that would not be needed otherwise (Stefan can clarify).
About jenkins: Seems to be a good idea and would help detect patch bitrot.
Agreed, but still doesn't really help lower the maintenance burden.
About gerrit: Last time I tried gerrit the usability was horrible:
- needs registration (like a forum)
- has no usable mail interface (like a forum)
Who says people can't send patches via mail? Those who want to stick with the current process (but with an arguably better SCM) can certainly do so. I don't see why it must be one or the other.
Registration does kind of suck, but again, many active developers already have a GitHub account (if not a Google account).
- you can't work on drafts for a review unless you keep the web browser
window open (like a forum)
That't simply incorrect. One can upload drafts and work on them just as with any other patch. Here's some more info: http://www.coreboot.org/pipermail/coreboot/2012-November/071963.html
If we really want to move to gerrit, we should close the mailing list as well and switch to a forum which has roughly the same usability as gerrit. I really mean it. We seriously should consider moving to a forum _if_ developers prefer forum interfaces to mail.
Would you also make the same recommendation for the coreboot mailing list? I doubt that anybody on the CB mailing list would want to do that.
Regards, Carl-Daniel
On 07.08.2015 20:51, David Hendricks wrote:
For those who missed it on IRC, Stefan (Reinauer) has proposed retiring SVN and patch work in favor of Git and (likely) Gerrit + Jenkins. Maintaining SVN and Patchwork represents a surprisingly large maintenance burden on top of Git and Gerrit that coreboot uses. Additionally, many in the community work around SVN's limitations by mirroring the project at places like Github anyway.
Stefan put up a Doodle poll here to hear out comments/concerns: http://doodle.com/p2dxtnksmsgwmzrq
-- David Hendricks (dhendrix) Systems Software Engineer, Google Inc.
flashrom mailing list flashrom@flashrom.org http://www.flashrom.org/mailman/listinfo/flashrom
<
flashrom mailing list flashrom@flashrom.org http://www.flashrom.org/mailman/listinfo/flashrom
2015-08-08 10:23 GMT+02:00 Carl-Daniel Hailfinger < c-d.hailfinger.devel.2006@gmx.net>:
If there really is a large demand for a non-svn hosting, I would be open to using mercurial (as master) because it at least has some sort of usability and can provide (conceptually limited) version numbers. I have worked for a few years with mercurial and the version numbers are extremely helpful even if they are per-branch and only semi-stable.
I wanted to note that mercurial can use git servers in the backend: http://hg-git.github.io/
Patrick
-
Carl-Daniel Hailfinger -
David Hendricks -
Patrick Georgi