Adriaan de Groot adridg at
Wed May 29 10:13:54 UTC 2019

Hi all,

Presumably Ed will provide a kick-off message soon-ish for the git WG.

Reading developers@ has been rather disheartening, mostly because *all* the 
talking points there are the same as the talking points that KDE went through 
whenever we switched from SVN (at the time, pretty much the largest SVN repo 
in the world) to git.

Anyway: hi!

I'm [ade] on IRC, adridg@ on mail, and Adriaan in real life. I wear KDE and 
FreeBSD hats, and have a fair amount of experience in juggling svn (FreeBSD), 
hg (when I did Solaris packaging) and git (KDE) repositories. I used darcs for 
a month, and CVS of course back in the '90s.

If I may make a position statement to start off with (before Ed's kick-off):

We need to know what the question is, and then we can untangle all the answers 
we already have.

This sounds a lot like the Hitchhiker's Guide, really. Watching the BSDCan 
video it looks like core@ is asking the WG "to make the move to git happen". 
That's rather vague as a mandate and as a question: git for what? Which 
software or data artifacts are to be moved into git? Does that cover src, 
ports, docs in their current form? Is some form of repo-reorganization 
desired? Splitting repo's?

Knowing the exact question helps steer discussions around workflow, tooling, 
and the documentation of workflow and tooling. ports/ *isn't* src/, and works 
quite differently. Tooling revolves around GitHub, GitLab, git command-line, 
etc. There's plenty to sort out there both philosophically and practically.

All of this against the background of what's *fait accompli*.


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 228 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: <>

More information about the freebsd-git mailing list