From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from [216.145.245.198] (helo=mx02.dls.net) by linuxtogo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1JZ4EJ-0004Km-8f for openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org; Tue, 11 Mar 2008 14:09:26 +0100 Received: from gw.mwester.net ([209.242.5.110] helo=[192.168.1.111]) by mx02.dls.net with esmtpa (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1JZ4CM-0002ak-UV for openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org; Tue, 11 Mar 2008 08:07:19 -0500 Message-ID: <47D6847D.5070007@dls.net> Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2008 08:09:17 -0500 From: "Mike (mwester)" User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.12 (Windows/20080213) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org References: <200803110807.11368.zecke@selfish.org> In-Reply-To: <200803110807.11368.zecke@selfish.org> X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 216.145.245.198 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: mwester@dls.net X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.3 (2007-08-08) on serenity X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.1 required=5.0 tests=RDNS_NONE autolearn=no version=3.2.3 X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2.1 (built Tue, 21 Aug 2007 23:39:36 +0000) X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on linuxtogo.org) Subject: Re: Reconsidering the work flow and how the SCM system fits in X-BeenThere: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list Reply-To: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org List-Id: Using the OpenEmbedded metadata to build Distributions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2008 13:09:26 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit [top posting to save readers time] +100 from me (can I do that?) --- as a long time SCM proponent (SCM consulting has clothed and fed my family and put a roof over our heads for many years), I am hugely in favor of switching to another tool and using features such as branching! I haven't used git myself, but from what I've read, it seems to be the logical choice, so I concur with that choice as well. (It would be so incredible to have a proper tool for branching and merging - this would make me rather happy!) Mike (mwester) Holger Freyther wrote: > Hey, > > I'm anything but happy with the way we work with our repository. We have a > dreambox branch that is not mergable due issues with our SCM system, the > OpenMoko guys have to go back to diffing and applying the diff and merging by > hand, we just commit fundamental changes like sysroot, packaged-staging, RFCs > in one go and then do weeks of fixing. And I can continue with this list. > > What: I think we should use more branches > - As many shortlived and medium lived branches as developers want > - Shared branches for stuff like packaged staging, RFCs, sysroot. Were you > start the development, add features, other people will compile their stuff, > other compile and then you rebase and merge! > - Basicly you develop a feature in a branch until it is ready and not > impacting other things, then you rebase/cleanup, propose it for inclusion > and wait for feedback, then merge. > - Stable distributions and vendors get their own branch, they can merge, > cherry-pick what ever they want. > > > The issue: > - mtn can not merge. Forcing me to manually delete files in one copy to do a > merge is not acceptable. > - mtn has not the concept of short-lived branches (e.g. deleting their > existence once done), mtn suspend does not work as witnessed by our > automerger. > - mtn pluck is not making me happy > - I lack a GUI to easily browse the repository > - I can not clean up changes before I push them! > > > I want that we use more branches for development, apply review on them, > land/merge/push these branches after review, pull peoples changes from other > hosts, work on perfetch patch series before landing patches. I believe we > need to deploy this kind of development in OE again and as mtn is the > obstacle to this kind of development I propose to switch to another SCM > system that allows us to develop OpenEmbedded the way it should be developed. > > My criteria: > - Should have branches, easy merging, easy merging of merges > - Branches and merging should be cheap > - Make it easy to put the OE tree into another SCM and still be able > to merge (git-svn and such) > - A good graphical tool to browse the repository > - A good and maintained web frontend > - A good set of builtin tools (e.g. like git-add -i and git-rebase -i) > > I think the two options are hg and git, I tend to favor git due the size of > its community. I want to switch OE to one of these systems by the end of this > month and start using more branches and creating perfect patch series again. > > > comments? agreement? > > z. > > > PS: It is not the speed of mtn, it is the lack of development in areas like > branches, merging, rebasing, we need to use these in OE! > > _______________________________________________ > Openembedded-devel mailing list > Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org > http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel >