On 02/12/2013 04:20 AM, David Woodhouse wrote:
> On Tue, 2013-02-12 at 11:11 +0000, Grant Likely wrote:
>>
>>> This mismatch generally makes sharing changes/trees more difficult,
>>> and thus is a point in favor of git vs. git-svn.
>>
>> s/more difficult/impossible/ The git mirrors become basically
>> read-only w.r.t. the mainline tree. You cannot apply anything to the
>> git tree and do a round trip out to the mainline svn tree. It needs to
>> be respun to bring anything back in.
>
> Right. If we're serious about EDK-II being a base for real engineering
> collaboration, rather than just an irrelevant fig leaf while everyone
> *actually* ships something completely different¹, then I think we really
> need to be using a *distributed* version control system. It's the only
> sane way to permit the flow of commits from one tree to another.
>
Using a DSCM with good merging capabilities for EDK2, in particular,
would be a very good thing -- more so for the *commercial* users of
EDK2, where they don't have an upstream that everything is pushed back
to. Instead they maintain a delta set indefinitely, and being able to
conveniently pull in new changes from the EDK2 codebase would seem
essential.
Cross-platform capability would seem essential. In the past I would
have recommended Mercurial over git when that particular requirement
rears its head, but with even Microsoft having a git offering these days
I presume git is the future even there.
-hpa
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Free Next-Gen Firewall Hardware Offer
Buy your Sophos next-gen firewall before the end March 2013
and get the hardware for free! Learn more.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/sophos-d2d-feb
_______________________________________________
edk2-devel mailing list
edk2-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/edk2-devel
