Official GCC git repository

[Daniel Berlin]

On Fri, Mar 14, 2008 at 6:35 AM, Paolo Bonzini <bonzini@gnu.org> wrote:
>
>  > I could never understand why anyone would use anything but CVS (if that
>  > works for them), or git. The VCS-du-jour craze just confuses me.
>
>  I could understand a lot why people would use subversion and not CVS.
>  Not that I like subversion a lot (the trunk/branches/tags system seems a
>  bit ad-hoc for example, though I must admit it works great), but the gcc
>  CVS repository took 1 hour to tag, while it's constant time for subversion.
>
>  I could understand a little why people would use hg instead of git.  I
>  think that git's design is better, and most of the common objections are
>  red herring (e.g. I never had any problem with "git diff -rHEAD vs. git
>  diff" because, if my commit is complicated enough to add files, I always
>  use "git citool" to review it instead), but it didn't work well on
>  Windows until very recently, and there are no good tutorials IMNSHO.
git and hg mainly differ in backend storage more than anything else.
It would be not difficult to write a bridge from one to the other.

My current plan is to bug a few of our devs to try git, and a few to
try hg (for a few weeks each), giving them whatever tutorials are
around, and see if they find it better enough than subversion.

(Personally, I use hg now because being able to log/etc the entire gcc
history and do offline commits makes my life a lot easier now that i
travel more).