From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ryan Anderson Subject: Re: Errors GITtifying GCC and Binutils Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2006 16:02:15 -0500 Message-ID: <20060323210215.GH26071@mythryan2.michonline.com> References: <20060322133337.GU20746@lug-owl.de> <44223B90.3040500@zytor.com> <1143128751.6850.35.camel@neko.keithp.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Keith Packard , "H. Peter Anvin" , Jan-Benedict Glaw , git@vger.kernel.org X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Thu Mar 23 22:03:48 2006 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FMWyA-0002YG-H8 for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Thu, 23 Mar 2006 22:03:46 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1422697AbWCWVDn (ORCPT ); Thu, 23 Mar 2006 16:03:43 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S964935AbWCWVDn (ORCPT ); Thu, 23 Mar 2006 16:03:43 -0500 Received: from mail.autoweb.net ([198.172.237.26]:57222 "EHLO mail.internal.autoweb.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S964940AbWCWVDm (ORCPT ); Thu, 23 Mar 2006 16:03:42 -0500 Received: from c-68-60-186-73.hsd1.mi.comcast.net ([68.60.186.73] helo=h4x0r5.com) by mail.internal.autoweb.net with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1FMWxk-0003Pe-7W; Thu, 23 Mar 2006 16:03:21 -0500 Received: from mythical ([10.254.251.11] ident=Debian-exim) by h4x0r5.com with esmtps (TLS-1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1FMWxf-0005rv-U1; Thu, 23 Mar 2006 16:03:15 -0500 Received: from ryan by mythical with local (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1FMWxB-0005EE-OC; Thu, 23 Mar 2006 16:02:45 -0500 To: Linus Torvalds Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11+cvs20060126 X-h4x0r5.com-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-h4x0r5.com-MailScanner-From: ryan@michonline.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Thu, Mar 23, 2006 at 08:01:14AM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Thu, 23 Mar 2006, Keith Packard wrote: > > > > Note that vendor branches are always made from the first revision along > > a branch, independent of when they occur, so you'll get 1.1.3.1 even if > > the head revision along the trunk is 1.246. > > I have to say, that one thing I've learnt during this whole git thing is > that other SCM's are DAMN CONFUSED. > > I used to think that git was potentially hard to understand. Not so. git > is an absolute paragon of logic and easy-to-understand concepts. > > Compared to SVN (can anybody sat "trunk/branch/tag confusion") and CVS, > git is not only a hell of a lot more capable, it's just more logical. This might be somewhat controversial, and I haven't done any research to confirm my impression, but you might be just seeing the symptoms of different ways of looking at the problem. Scott Collins (QT evangelist, incredibly smart guy) commented to me sometime over the summer, that every new SCM was born out of someone's desire to implement a new merge algorithm. While I think that's too simple, I think there have been an awful lot of academic SCMs out there. Git has taken a very pragmatic approach, in that the goal has been "What is the smallest number of concepts we can create that let us solve the problem, even if we occassionally have to make some tradeoffs?" (Thinking of rename detection there, mostly.) So, really, I guess the comment I'm trying to make here is that Occam was right. -- Ryan Anderson sometimes Pug Majere