Thanks for the extra information. Just on a technical note, let's say I e-mail you and say 'pull the changes I've made from my local repository into yours', this means that I have to have my work pc publicly available. I assume that git has a certain port it works on. Is that correct? Kyle On 3/19/07, Jerry Van Baren <gerald.vanbaren@smiths-aerospace.com> wrote:
Well, it is hard to be definitive without a clue of your current development methodologies, but I would speculate that it will take somewhere from little more to a lot less time than CVS/SVN with multiple writers (note that you can still have multiple writers with git, it just is not generally useful since everybody has their own copy of the repository).
If the code in CVS never gets messed up because of multiple people committing incompatible changes, it will take minimal extra time for everybody upstream to pull changes.
On the other hand, if ever you get a mess due to multiple people committing incompatible stuff in CVS, you've just saved every bit of time that the extra pulling cost. I suspect this has already happened at least once. :-/
I tried to outline a "pull" scenario in a previous email to illustrate that it is NOT painful. Doing a pull is a single command you run that takes seconds to run and you do it occasionally (on demand, when you feel like it, once a day, once a week, whatever makes sense). It is the same level of effort as doing a "svn update". In addition, if you use local source control (maintaining a local copy of the cvs/svn repository to track local changes or using RCS locally) *which all developers should do*, git is a huge improvement.
All of the developers will benefit (save time) with git, so the net time savings equation is positive, regardless. There is a learning curve to climb, but it isn't very steep and the rewards are pretty good. RCS - gets the job done but cannot share the changes CVS - gets the job done over the wire, allowing sharing (Pinto) SVN - puts a turbocharger in the Pinto (Pangra) git - everybody makes their own clone of the Lamborghini
Reference pointers for the non-US residents (and youngsters ;-): <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Pinto> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supercar>
Best regards, gvb
Kyle Hall wrote:
I think everyone would agree that more checking of code is good. As long as you and Paul and Josh are willing to put in a bit more time, I imagine everyone will be all for it. I think the big question is *how much* more time will it require from you guys. I think only the people currently using git will be able to help us answer us.
Kyle
On 3/16/07, *Chris Cormack* <chris@katipo.co.nz <mailto:chris@katipo.co.nz>> wrote:
On Fri, Mar 16, 2007 at 03:04:30PM -0400, Kyle Hall said: > Thank you for illuminating us on the ways of git ; ) > It seems from you're description if there are lot's of Kyle's, that the > likes of Chris and Paul are in for more work that previously. I, on the > other hand, would be effected little. > Speaking as Chris
I don't think this is nessecarily a bad thing, a bit more checking as code comes in can save a bunch of time in the future. I guess what I'm saying is we should be doing something like this currently anyway, at least we should be sanity checking code as its committed. We wouldnt end up with dual implementation of the same feature, and some of the duplicate code we now have.
Chris
-- Chris Cormack Programmer 027 4500 789 Katipo Communications Ltd chris@katipo.co.nz <mailto:chris@katipo.co.nz www.katipo.co.nz <http://www.katipo.co.nz>
-- IT Tech Crawford County Federated Library System ______________________________________________________________________ CAUTION: This message was sent via the Public Internet and its authenticity cannot be guaranteed.
______________________________________________________
-- IT Tech Crawford County Federated Library System