db-derby-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Rick Hillegas <rick.hille...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: switch to git?
Date Tue, 18 Dec 2018 01:34:51 GMT
I appreciate your willingness to contribute. Nevertheless, I think that

* git is a poor fit for Derby's culture of incremental development and 
is, instead, better suited to large projects where teams work in 
isolation from one another on large contributions

* git has the worst merge tool I have ever used

* git is extremely confusing for developers coming from a subversion 
mind set (like myself)

* everyone I know who uses git has ended up shooting themselves in the foot

Here is how I rank (in descending order) the repository management tools 
I have used:

* subversion (simple model, good merge tool)
* mercurial (complex model but good merge tool)
* perforce (lousy merge tool)
* clearcase (overarchitected)
* git (overarchitected, lousy merge tool)

My $0.02,

On 12/17/18 4:20 PM, Alex O'Ree wrote:
> I wasn't at first either. It seems unnecessary at a glance. It does 
> greatly simplify accepting contributions from users without commit 
> rights. For outside committers, they can commit as much as they need 
> to without affecting the baseline. Which makes things much easier for 
> larger tasks. Pull requests and code reviews are much simpler than 
> reviewing a patch file. In general, merging branches is less painful. 
> Just my 2 cents. History is maintained with the conversion, in case 
> that's a concern.
> So as someone that wants to contribute to this project, I'm asking the 
> question because it would make my life easier.
> On Mon, Dec 17, 2018 at 11:05 AM Rick Hillegas 
> <rick.hillegas@gmail.com <mailto:rick.hillegas@gmail.com>> wrote:
>     On 12/16/18 4:16 PM, Alex O'Ree wrote:
>     > Has anyone suggested switching to git? ASF makes the change pretty
>     > painless
>     I'm not a git enthusiast.

View raw message