On 1/28/2011 1:46 PM, John Maddock wrote:
The current approach implements the view of Boost as a particular set of libraries ONLY built/tested/distributed as an whole.
My view is that is not scaling well and can never do so.
+1
Still, that doesn't mean we're going to be more nimble and scalable if there's no standardization of tools across Boost. Quite the contrary, IMO. I can imagine all kinds of problems coming up that are simply ruled out by using the same tools.
+1 from me, we must IMO have standardized tools - whatever we decide those are - otherwise what you're proposing is the complete fragmentation of Boost into something even more unmanageable than now.
I still haven't heard from the git proponents, what's wrong with using git-svn to manage a local - i.e. distributed - git repository, and then periodically pushing changes to SVN. In other words working with git just as you normally would, except for having to type "git svn" from time to time? This isn't a rhetorical question BTW, I've never used either git or git-svn, so I clearly don't know what I'm missing ;-)
The arguments of Git's superiority as a distributed VCS over SVN's centralized VCS do not convince me either. I understand them but I wonder if the switch from SVN to Git is worth it just so end-users can make their own changes to a local Git repository and then push their entire repository to a centralized location some time later. This is as opposed to SVN users making periodic changes by committing to a centralized SVN repository periodically. I just do not see the big deal in the difference. I do not see Boost's possible need to become less centralized and go from a monolithic distribution to possible individual distributions as dependent on using a distributed repository model versus a centralized repository model. I believe many other issues are much more important, as brought up by Robert Ramey and others. I would much rather Boost have a discussion of those other issues than focus on Git versus SVN, which I think of as just another red herring.
John.
PS, just looked at the git website, and it appears that us Windows users are restricted to either Cygwin or MSys builds? If so that appears to be a major drawback IMO.... OK I see there's a TortoiseGit, but it looks distinctly immature at first glance, and still depends on MSys (i.e. no easy integrated install)?
I have not looked at what it takes to build it from source, but installing Tortoise Git on Windows is pretty easy from a binary download. The documentation is not as good as Tortoise SVN amd leaves much to be desired. There is a mailing list/Gmane NG for questions etc.