Splitting out core and bindings final stages

Rob Taylor robtaylor at floopily.org
Sun May 7 16:17:59 PDT 2006

John (J5) Palmieri wrote:
> On Sat, 2006-05-06 at 16:46 +0100, Rob Taylor wrote:
>> John (J5) Palmieri wrote:
>>> On Fri, 2006-05-05 at 18:06 +1000, Brad Hards wrote:
>>>> On Friday 05 May 2006 09:17 am, John (J5) Palmieri wrote:
>>>>> NOTE: for the time being the dbus core libraries will continue to be
>>>>> worked on in CVS and the bindings in git once the move happens.  The
>>>>> core, along with its history will also be in git and if we ever decide
>>>>> to move it we can import again from CVS and not duplicate the history.
>>>> Where / when was the decision to move to git made?
>>>> Brad
>>> On the dbus irc channel.  Remember the move is only for the bindings
>>> right now and not core.
>> I should say that the consensus for git isn't absolute 
> I was pretty strong.  In fact if I remember correctly the sentiments
> were (paraphrasing) "anything but SVN" and "git looks like the best
> choice".  

IIRC, we definitely decided on a distributed RCS. I still think its best
to evaluate the options before jumping ship.

>> - One worry I
>> have is that it doesn't work on windows. 
> Except that it does, Cairo devs has been using it since they switched.

Hmm, yes, it seems that I'm mistaken, but it's not without its problems:

>> I like the idea of using a
>> distributed RCS, but probably bzr would be better for a cross platform
>> library like this. Dafydd Harries is currently having a look at the
>> feasibility of importing and syncing dbus cvs with bzr, so I'll report
>> back on that when he has some results.
> Yay, yet another tool for fd.o admins to look after.  I'm half tempted
> to just replay the git split back into CVS to avoid the controversy that
> this is going to cause.

We've often discussed putting bzr on fd.o. I don't think its a huge
issue and I really don't see any controversy in evaluating our options.

Do remember that Robert McQueen is now also an fd.o admin.

> Carl already went through this and wrote up a nice why git when he went
> through the cairo change
> (http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/cairo/2006-February/006255.html).
> The main points are 
> A) It really doesn't matter which distributed VCS we use because they
> all basically work the same and if at one point one tool turns out to be
> the winner it is easy to go from one to the other
> B) git's layered approach makes it very easy to make it do what you
> want.  I can attest to this fact being that splitting out the repository
> was easier than I thought.
> Also Carl's knowledge with respect to git is nothing to sneeze at.
> Having him as a resource at fd.o is invaluable.  What it comes down to
> is the tide is moving towards git at fd.o.  The general consensus of the
> active d-bus devs was to go to a distributed system (Havoc being the one
> holdout which does hold a lot of weight, but you said you wouldn't be a
> blocker ;-).  I saw no point in going against the tide since the
> advantages of sticking with what the rest of fd.o is doing (with the
> free resources that affords us) far outweighs the differences between
> git, bzr and mercurial.

It's certainly valuable to have expertise in a system to consult! As far
as bzr goes, Dafydd Harries has a lot of experience in it, being an
ex-Canonical employee. Canonical has been using bzr for all their source
code management for quite a long time now, and everything I've heard
from those using it has been good.

You should note that Carl didn't really evaluate bzr in the above post...

> Already the d-bus developers are stretched thin in terms of time
> allotted to developing for it.  My goal and in fact my job as the
> defacto maintainer is to move us forward to a stable 1.0.  If we are
> going to block on this I'm serious about being just as well with
> sticking with CVS.

How bad a block is a few days of evaluating our options? Once we switch
we'll be stuck with our choice, so I would certainly hope we choose one
that's most developer-time efficient going forward. We certainly don't
want to add more work to our stretched roles already ;)

I would suggest that we get both bzr and git repos set up and try them
both out before jumping ship in any direction.

Rob Taylor

More information about the dbus mailing list