Changes between Version 5 and Version 6 of Git/WhyGit


Ignore:
Timestamp:
Mar 27, 2012, 12:43:26 PM (11 years ago)
Author:
Beman Dawes
Comment:

--

Legend:

Unmodified
Added
Removed
Modified

  • Git/WhyGit

    v5 v6  
    11= Why Should Boost Move to Git?
    22
    3 Subversion works well for Boost's version control needs, so why should we move to Git?
     3Subversion has met Boost's version control needs for many years, so why should we move to Git?
    44
    55That's really the wrong question. Here are the real questions:
    … …  
    77== How can Boost grow to encompass many more libraries without becoming unwieldy? ==
    88
    9 Some aspects of Boost are already unwieldy, such as the trunk vs release-branch split, and the regression testing system. Users want to be able to install only the portions of Boost they are interested in, yet get dependencies automatically.
     9Some aspects of Boost are already unwieldy, such as the trunk vs release-branch split, and the regression testing system. Also, users want to be able to install only the portions of Boost they are interested in, yet get dependencies automatically.
    1010
    11 Decoupling the individual Boost libraries would be very helpful, or even essential, to solving those big picture problems. Decoupling would also make it easier for individual libraries to follow their own development cycles and development styles.
     11Decoupling the individual Boost libraries would be very helpful, or even essential, to solving those big picture problems. Decoupling would also make it easier for individual libraries to follow their own development cycles, styles, and workflows.
    1212
    1313Decoupling is often called "modularization". See www.ryppl.org for one take on Boost modularization.
    1414
    15 == Why should Boost move to a distributed version control system? ==
     15== Why should Boost move to a distributed version control system (DVCS)? ==
    1616
    17 * Enables decoupling and modularization. While decoupling and modularization is certainly possible with non-distributed version control, a distributed version control system makes it much easier. As a consequence, many large open-source projects have moved or are moving to DVCS.
     17* Distributed version control enables easier decoupling and modularization. While decoupling and modularization is certainly possible with non-distributed version control, a distributed version control system makes it '''much''' easier. As a consequence, many large open-source projects have moved or are moving to DVCS.
    1818
    19 * Decouples the Boost mothership repository from developers' local repositories:
     19* DVCS supports a much wider variety of workflows:
    2020  * Allows developers to commit, branch, merge, and perform other version control operations while offline.
    2121  * Allows developers to commit partial work locally without breaking the trunk.
    … …  
    2323  * Is often faster for everyday operations, and sometimes much faster.
    2424
    25 * Allows public library specific repositories, such as on GitHub:
     25* Allows public library specific repositories, such as on GitHub.
    2626
    27 * Scales up to a much larger number of libraries:
     27* Scales up to a much larger number of libraries.
    2828
    2929* Encourages wider participation and eases patches. The ability to submit pull requests provides a smoother way for a new developer to ease into participation, and makes it easier to submit and apply non-trivial patches. (I'm pretty sure that has been the experience of other projects, but a citation or two would be useful.)
    30 
    31 * Eliminates much or all of the need for the sandbox.
    3230
    3331== Why should Boost choose Git as our distributed version control system? ==