Re: [Qemu-devel] qemu Changelog Makefile Makefile.target TODO ae...

[Ben Taylor <sol10x86@cox.net>]

---- "J. Mayer" <l_indien@magic.fr> wrote: 
> On Mon, 2007-09-17 at 23:14 +0200, Luca wrote:
> > On 9/17/07, Andreas Färber <andreas.faerber@web.de> wrote:
> > >
> > > Am 17.09.2007 um 14:18 schrieb Christian MICHON:
> > >
> > > > On 9/17/07, Philip Boulain <prb@ecs.soton.ac.uk> wrote:
> > > >>>>>> DON'T DO THIS KIND OF COMMIT AGAIN, PLEASE.
> > > >>>>> if we were using git (but you can do it locally anyway), you
> > > >>>>> would not
> > > >>>>> have these conflicts problems...
> > > >>>> Maybe... but Savannah uses a CVS frontend, as far as I know...
> > > >>> Those are excuses.
> > > >>
> > > >> So is a "you should have used X" argument. It doesn't invalidate the
> > > >> point that the commit was disruptive, and merely acts as bait for the
> > > >> grand old "version repository" flamewar.*
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > > since I mentionned "you should have used Git", I'll repeat:
> > > > this commit was not disruptive to any of the Git users, and will
> > > > never be.
> > > >
> > > > Evolve, or prepare to be assimilated into the Collective...
> > >
> > > Both the qemu.org and the Savannah project page only mention CVS. If
> > > there are better ways to get the code then inform your users how to
> > > use that.
> 
> > http://brick.kernel.dk/git/?p=qemu.git;a=summary
> > It's tracking QEMU CVS; you're right that it's not mentioned anywhere
> > on the site (AFAICS).
> > You can also DIY with git-cvsimport; see e.g.
> > http://chneukirchen.org/blog/archive/2006/04/tracking-the-ruby-cvs-with-git.html
> 
> Another point is CVS is an industry standard. It has many drawbacks but
> is prooven to do its job as specified in a very reliable way. For now,
> not such a thing for git, afaik. If it ever become the new industry
> standard, after having prooven its reliability and long term stability,
> then you may be able to expect everyone to use it.
> Did anyone has done a long term comparison of CVS and git running on two copies of the
> same production repository and have made sure that any extraction at any
> time of any data (ie, checkout in the present and any date in the past,
> diffs, ...) of the two gives exactly the same result ? Please show me
> such studies and I may reconsider my position... If not, you can always
> use it, closing your eyes and praying for everything to be OK...

The wine folks have been using it for a while, (maybe a  year?), and they 
are prolithic committers.  I see approximately 20-30 patches a day, monday-friday.