[netperf-talk] To git or not to git

[Andrew Gallatin]

On 02/24/12 16:46, Rick Jones wrote:
> On 02/24/2012 01:42 PM, Andrew Gallatin wrote:
>> On 02/24/12 16:23, Rick Jones wrote:
>>
>>> Subversion has been working fine for me for netperf since the first day
>>
>> So why change?
>>
>> Maybe it is the old fashioned CVS using fossil in me, but I find git
>> rather annoying in a lot of areas.
>
> It was suggested by a couple folks - folks who's worlds are already
> primarily git I suspect. My own world apart from netperf is rather
> "gittish" but while it might be nice to convert netperf to git for some
> of the situations I find myself in, I wanted to get input from other
> netperf users.

My specific objection to git in the context of netperf is based on my
tendency to maintain local patches.  An "svn up" with a local patchset
is simple & just works.  In the rare case of a conflict, you get a nice
set of <<< >>> markers to deal with.  But a "git pull" tends to fail
on a "dirty" tree and insists you do this work yourself (via
git stash).

Every time I use git, I feel like somebody trying to drive a race car
on the street.  Ever see that Top Gear where one of the presenters
took an Aston Martin Vantage N24 on a long road trip, and sweated
to death because of no a/c, failed to start the car leaving a ferry
due to the 17 switches that had to be in the right positions, etc?
See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aston_Martin_Vantage_N24
That's what I feel like when using git..

But it is ultimately your project..

Drew