Re: hg, git, fossil, ...

References	(9 earlier) <53FE22C7.3090806@stoneleaf.us> <mailman.13519.1409165474.18130.python-list@python.org> <87tx4xw3ye.fsf@elektro.pacujo.net> <mailman.13568.1409240362.18130.python-list@python.org> <87oav4wpu0.fsf@elektro.pacujo.net>
From	Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com>
Date	2014-08-28 20:20 -0600
Subject	Re: hg, git, fossil, ...
Newsgroups	comp.lang.python
Message-ID	<mailman.13593.1409278877.18130.python-list@python.org> (permalink)

Show all headers | View raw

On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 10:17 AM, Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> wrote:
> 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.

So then to tag or branch a release I guess you would create the same
tag/branch on every single component subrepository?  And when you need
to checkout that old version you checkout every subrepository
independently. Sounds painful, but not unworkable.

But then what do you do if you need to checkout an intermediate
revision of the project that isn't tagged? This need does arise. You
can't just checkout the revision you want of a particular component,
because that old revision of that component may not be compatible with
the other components at HEAD. Even if it is, you're still checking out
a version of the repository that never actually existed. You can't
expect to reproduce behavior at a particular revision if you can't
even consistently recreate the revision.

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