Re: [Qemu-devel] qemu Changelog Makefile Makefile.target TODO ae...

[Andreas Färber]

Hey,

Am 18.09.2007 um 00:47 schrieb Johannes Schindelin:

> > Both the qemu.org and the Savannah project page only mention CVS. If
> > there are better ways to get the code then inform your users how  
> > to use
> > that.
>
> What about graphical diff tools?  Should you _not_ use them,  
> because CVS
> has an in-built diff?
>
> Frankly, if even the most proficient committer of QEmu admits to use
> quilt, which is definitely not CVS, you should rethink what you just
> wrote.
>
> Sticking to a tried and proven standard is one thing.
>
> Sticking to an ancient standard that has proven to have severe
> shortcomings (so much so that the ATM most popular central SCM,
> Subversion, claims it is "CVS done right"; that alone should tell you
> something), when there are better alternatives around, which  
> moreover have
> no problems talking back to CVS, is, well, not so clever.
>
> Note that I do not say you should use git.  Just as I do not say  
> you have
> to stick with CVS.

Just to make this perfectly clear: I am not sticking to CVS at all.  
And I still believe I raised a valid point, being that you (the QEMU  
core developers) can't expect people to use e.g. git if only CVS is  
mentioned. No more, no less.

This has nothing to do with what (graphical) tools a user might use  
or not to look at patches/merges. The core problem that brought this  
discussion up is that using CVS it is "hard" to merge changes, i.e.  
it is not capable of doing so automatically in the 80% cases (if it  
were, no graphical tool would be needed either).

Neither am I sticking to CVS nor am I considering it proven nor do I  
like or even personally use it (I do prefer Subversion!). I use CVS  
here because that's the documented way to access the QEMU repository  
at Savannah (implication: if I do, others do so as well). Will  
personally look into git in the future - but my post was not about me.

To repeat, if you expect people to use git or something else ontop of  
or instead of CVS then tell people prominently so - not just here in  
the future discussion archives where newbies won't search for what  
they don't know, if they read the CVS instructions.

I am not opposing code cleanup, as seen here, but I do see the merge  
problem - for example with the ppc emulation issue on OS X that  
hasn't been responded to.

Regards,
Andreas