Re: WITH RECURSIVE updated to CVS TIP - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

* David Fetter <david@fetter.org> [080710 10:19]:

> > The question is: what is your objective in providing this repository?
> 
> Here are my objectives:
> 
> 1.  Make a repository that keeps up with CVS HEAD.

There are already at least 2 public ones that do:git://repo.or.cz/PostgreSQL.gitgit.postgresql.org (which seems to work
beston http only!?!?!)
 

> 2.  Allow people who are not currently committers on CVS HEAD to make
> needed changes.

Uh, the point of git is it's distributed, so you don't need to be
involved for them to do that....

> If you know a better way to do this, I'm all ears :)  I'm completely
> new to git and pretty fuzzy on CVS.

Well, if you want to use git to it's fullest extent, you really need to 
unlearn *all* of the ideas and restrictions your fuzzy CVS knowledge is
handcuffing you with.  Or at least be able to stuff it in a box in some
dark recess of your brain, so as to not let it control the way you try
and use Git.

Git is *inherently* distributed.  And it's *only* a "Content tracker".
Because of this, it works spectacularly well as 2 quite different tools:

1) A developer tool to manage their ideas, developments, and code (track)
2) A content distribution tool (publish)

> They aren't committing, at least in part, because they did not have
> any way to do so.  I'm fixing things so that they do by creating
> git-shell accounts on git.postgresql.org which will have write access
> to that repository.

Committing in GIT has *nothing* to do with an account on
git.postgresql.org.  It's a local operation, and if they are using git
already, they can publish any number of places.  And If they aren't
using git already, then a git-shell account, or some special single repo
on git.postgresql.org isn't going to change that.

You seem to be trying to setup git as a "centralized" distribution tool
(#2 above), without it being used as a developer tool (#1).  I really
don't see the point of that.  The only difference from CVS that use will
provide is you can provide CVS+patch "easily".  But anybody who's going
to use git to get CVS+patch already has git, and thus has CVS+patch
locally available in 1 command anyways...

I think Git's use as #1 *has* to come first.  And, because of it's
inherently distributed nature, #2 "just happens" once people are using
it...

a.

-- 
Aidan Van Dyk                                             Create like a god,
aidan@highrise.ca                                       command like a king,
http://www.highrise.ca/                                   work like a slave.