Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.python > #77220

Re: hg, git, fossil, ...

Show all headers | View raw

Ned Batchelder <ned@nedbatchelder.com>:

> I feel like I am misunderstanding you.  My summary of what you just said
> is, "I have two scenarios where my code went through different sequences
> of changes to end up with the same content.  I expect both of those
> paths will show the same history."  That sounds nonsensical to me, so I
> must be misunderstanding you.  The path the file followed (that is, the
> sequence of changes that made the file what it is), *is* the history of
> the file.

Not the file but the repository.

Imagine we have CPython 3.9. It might have an ancient implementation of
the deque. Then somebody realizes there's an embarrassing bug that
requires a simple fix in a C file. The fix is implemented in HEAD. Then,
it is propagated down to 3.9, 3.8, ... 3.0. You obviously couldn't use
"hg pull" for the propagation since hg would insist on propagating all
the unrelated features as well.

With TeamWare, Bitkeeper(?) and CVS the process is simple since they
retain the file scope. Propagating a fix from HEAD to 3.0 is equivalent
to propagating a fix from 3.0 to HEAD. After the pull/push, if you look
at the version history, you couldn't say which way the process went
since the pull/push operation itself doesn't leave a trace. (Well, in
CVS, it does, but that's bad.)

In large repositories (like CPython), you have independent modules with
relatively independent (and typically linear) histories. Hg and git
don't want to respect that independence.

As I said before, the problem is alleviated or goes away if you split
your large repositories into tiny repositories. Then, looking at the
example above, you could have a collections repository. CPython 3.0 and
3.9 might use the same version of the collections component. The bug
would then be fixed in collections and both CPython 3.0 and 3.9 would
simply update their component dependency to the latest and greatest
collections.


Marko

Back to comp.lang.python | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Re: Python vs C++ Amirouche Boubekki <amirouche.boubekki@gmail.com> - 2014-08-26 10:12 +0200
  Re: Python vs C++ alex23 <wuwei23@gmail.com> - 2014-08-27 15:43 +1000
    Re: Python vs C++ Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2014-08-27 00:23 -0600
    Re: Python vs C++ Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2014-08-27 00:33 -0600
    Re: What is acceptable as 'open-source'?  [was Python vs C++] "Frank Millman" <frank@chagford.com> - 2014-08-27 09:50 +0200
      Re: What is acceptable as 'open-source'? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-08-27 09:38 -0700
        Re: What is acceptable as 'open-source'? Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2014-08-27 20:14 +0300
          Re: What is acceptable as 'open-source'? Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2014-08-27 10:41 -0700
          Re: What is acceptable as 'open-source'? Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-08-28 08:46 +1000
            Re: What is acceptable as 'open-source'? Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2014-08-28 08:31 +0300
              Re: What is acceptable as 'open-source'? Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-08-28 15:44 +1000
      Re: What is acceptable as 'open-source'?  [was Python vs C++] Christian Gollwitzer <auriocus@gmx.de> - 2014-08-27 21:41 +0200
    Re: What is acceptable as 'open-source'? [was Python vs C++] Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-08-27 18:03 +1000
    Re: What is acceptable as 'open-source'?  [was Python vs C++] Ned Batchelder <ned@nedbatchelder.com> - 2014-08-27 07:54 -0400
      Re: What is acceptable as 'open-source'?  [was Python vs C++] Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2014-08-27 10:29 -0700
        hg, git, fossil, ... [was Re: What is acceptable as 'open-source'? [was Python vs C++]] Ethan Furman <ethan@stoneleaf.us> - 2014-08-27 11:26 -0700
        Re: hg, git, fossil, ... [was Re: What is acceptable as 'open-source'? [was Python vs C++]] Skip Montanaro <skip@pobox.com> - 2014-08-27 13:51 -0500
          Re: hg, git, fossil, ... Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2014-08-28 08:58 +0300
            Re: hg, git, fossil, ... Tim Chase <python.list@tim.thechases.com> - 2014-08-28 09:56 -0500
            Re: hg, git, fossil, ... Ned Batchelder <ned@nedbatchelder.com> - 2014-08-28 11:39 -0400
              Re: hg, git, fossil, ... Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2014-08-28 19:17 +0300
                Re: hg, git, fossil, ... Tim Chase <python.list@tim.thechases.com> - 2014-08-28 11:32 -0500
                Re: hg, git, fossil, ... Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-08-29 02:38 +1000
                Re: hg, git, fossil, ... Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2014-08-28 22:37 +0300
                Re: hg, git, fossil, ... Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-08-29 09:08 +1000
                Re: hg, git, fossil, ... Lele Gaifax <lele@metapensiero.it> - 2014-08-29 09:43 +0200
                Re: hg, git, fossil, ... Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2014-08-29 10:54 +0300
                Re: hg, git, fossil, ... Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2014-08-28 13:40 -0400
                Re: hg, git, fossil, ... Tim Delaney <timothy.c.delaney@gmail.com> - 2014-08-29 07:25 +1000
                Re: hg, git, fossil, ... Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2014-08-28 22:41 +0100
                Re: hg, git, fossil, ... Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2014-08-28 20:20 -0600
                Re: hg, git, fossil, ... Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2014-08-29 08:59 +0300
                Re: hg, git, fossil, ... Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-08-29 17:20 +1000
                Re: hg, git, fossil, ... Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2014-08-29 10:48 +0300
                Re: hg, git, fossil, ... Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-08-29 12:24 +1000
                Re: hg, git, fossil, ... Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2014-08-28 19:53 -0700
            Re: hg, git, fossil, ... Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2014-08-28 19:56 -0600
              Re: hg, git, fossil, ... Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2014-08-29 08:50 +0300
                Re: hg, git, fossil, ... Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-08-29 17:19 +1000
                Re: hg, git, fossil, ... Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2014-08-29 10:43 +0300
        Re: hg, git, fossil, ... [was Re: What is acceptable as 'open-source'? [was Python vs C++]] Ethan Furman <ethan@stoneleaf.us> - 2014-08-27 11:58 -0700
        Re: hg, git, fossil, ... [was Re: What is acceptable as 'open-source'? [was Python vs C++]] Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-08-28 09:07 +1000
    Re: Python vs C++ Amirouche Boubekki <amirouche.boubekki@gmail.com> - 2014-08-27 15:15 +0200
    Re: What is acceptable as 'open-source'? [was Python vs C++] "Frank Millman" <frank@chagford.com> - 2014-08-28 15:44 +0200
    Re: What is acceptable as 'open-source'? [was Python vs C++] Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-08-28 23:58 +1000

csiph-web