Re: Replace Mercurial with GIT as SCM

[Domenico Andreoli <cavokz@gmail.com>]

On Tue, Dec 01, 2009 at 06:25:00PM -0500, Andy Walls wrote:
> On Tue, 2009-12-01 at 15:59 +0100, Patrick Boettcher wrote:
> > Hi all,
> > 
> > I would like to start a discussion which ideally results in either 
> > changing the SCM of v4l-dvb to git _or_ leaving everything as it is today 
> > with mercurial.
> > 
> 
> > I'm waiting for comments.
> 
> I only have one requirement: reduce bandwidth usage between the server
> and my home.
> 
> The less I have to clone out 65 M of history to start a new series of
> patches the better.  I suppose that would include a rebase...

no, it would not. in case you feel better to clone something before a
rebase, you can clone it locally.

rebasing is an easily abused practice which destroys the history of
a branch and puts in trouble the followers of that branch. published
branch which is often rebased is usually frown upon.

git is a branch-merge-branch-throw-away-branch-branch-merge-... tool.
commit massaging is another tempting practice, it's so easy to produce a
cleaned up history of your branch. writing code in 2D is already pretty
difficult, God save us from writing code in 3D.

cheers,
Domenico

-----[ Domenico Andreoli, aka cavok
 --[ http://www.dandreoli.com/gpgkey.asc
   ---[ 3A0F 2F80 F79C 678A 8936  4FEE 0677 9033 A20E BC50