Moving xlibs modules to xorg

[Jamey Sharp]

On Sun, Mar 05, 2006 at 01:31:10PM -0800, David S. Miller wrote:
> I can't believe how much uncalled for backlash Keith has received by
> moving some things over to git.

It's been surprising me too, at least a little -- although there could
have been more discussion and advance notice, because there could always
be more discussion and advance notice. So while I hate to respond to
angry e-mail, here goes...

On Sun, Mar 05, 2006 at 11:59:28PM +0200, Daniel Stone wrote:
> I have an issue with moving to got, today, unilaterally, by surprise.

As far as I can tell, the entire community of people actively developing
Xlib was, in fact, consulted before it was migrated to GIT -- and I said
"yes". :-)

GIT has been a huge win for my productivity on X development, compared
with CVS. I think that should count for a lot in this discussion. Might
another tool have been even better? I don't know: perhaps. Does some
hypothetical improvement later justify continued pain now? I'll take the
sure win now, thanks.

> I don't know if monotone, rosegarden and bzr-ng have been looked into
> at all, but it wouldn't surprise me at all.

I've used monotone. I was extremely excited about it for a while, and I
have a great deal of respect for graydon, from what I've seen of him.
But I'm happy to be using GIT instead of monotone.

I still think that "monotone is slow" was a dumb reason for GIT to be
created though.

--Jamey
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg/attachments/20060305/e0771cc9/attachment.pgp>