Re: GIT and CVS

[Phil Muldoon <pmuldoon at redhat dot com>]

Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:

>> From: Phil Muldoon <pmuldoon@redhat.com>
>> Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2011 20:37:22 +0100
>> 
>> GIT is, I think, available everywhere, has a CVS interface, and is
>> far, far quicker than CVS.
>
> Git is available on GNU/Linux, which is a lot, but it ain't
> "everywhere".

I guess we have to quantify the development platforms for GDB.  This is
different from the deployment platforms.  On which platforms do
developers develop on GDB? Is GIT available there? Is there a platform
where people contribute where GIT is not available?  I hope to find that
out.

> My main development machines run MS-Windows.  Git sucks on MS-Windows

In which way, how does it differ from GNU/Linux * Distros? Do you have
the CVS add-on to git on MS-Windows? Are you running Cygwin? If it
sucks, is it a matter of requesting maintainer updates?

> (I don't like it much on GNU/Linux, either).  If we are to switch to
> git, it'll probably make me much less active as a member of the GDB
> project.

GIT offers a CVS extension to make this as transparent as possible.  Why
would that affect your contribution?

> If we are going to switch to a dVCS, git is not the only choice.  I
> like bzr better; bzr is a GNU project, unlike git.

Given your question above, does bzr fulfill the roles any better than
GIT?

Cheers,

Phil