Hello! This is a reaction to the "BTS overhaul" post, I just don't want to hijack the thread with a separate topic.
If someone asked me what is the project that is not using git but would benefit from it most, I would say it's GRUB. First and foremost, git (together with StGIT and other tools) relieves the pressure to commit. CVS and Subversion allow to work with only one patch at a time. I can have only one patch applied to the working directory if I want to commit one of the patches safely. There is no support for refining series of patches. StGIT exists precisely for that, and even bare git is getting better at that. Another closely related advantage is that git allows parallel development. Branching is built in from the beginning. There are unofficial forks of GRUB 1 already (such as grub4dos). git would help turn forks into branches, bring them under one roof and eventually allow merging all useful features together. Not to be overlooked it the git-bisect command. No amount of code review can prevent bugs, especially for software that interacts with "black box" firmware and hardware. Having an effective mechanism for bug isolation is essential. Tools for viewing history of the git repository, such as qgit, gitk and tig have no equivalents for CVS. And the tools for mailing series of patches are great time savers. git is actively developed and has a vibrant community. Yet it's well past the point where major incompatibilities are routinely introduced. Other GNU projects have switched to git. Savannah supports git. The list of the GNU projects using git is pretty impressive: http://git.sv.gnu.org/gitweb/ I think GNU GRUB would be a welcome addition. -- Regards, Pavel Roskin _______________________________________________ Grub-devel mailing list Grub-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/grub-devel