[alsa-devel] HG vs GIT

Jaroslav Kysela perex at perex.cz
Thu Feb 7 13:03:18 CET 2008

On Thu, 7 Feb 2008, Takashi Iwai wrote:

> At Thu, 7 Feb 2008 10:37:29 +0100 (CET),
> Jaroslav Kysela wrote:
> > 
> > Hi,
> > 
> > 	it seems that GIT matured somewhat. git-push has been implemneted. 
> > It was main reason to not use GIT when we made decision between HG and 
> > GIT.
> Hm, I thought it simply because you prefer python...

Yes, it was one reason. But I must also admit, that GIT evolution seems to 
be faster than Marcurial.

> > 	As we could have potential problems with branches in HG 
> > repository, I would like to consider a switch to GIT althought it means 
> > some changes in my scripts on ALSA server and my ksync tool.
> > 	I just successfully tried (a bit modified hg-to-git.py script) and 
> > it seems to be working properly.
> > 	Any objections?
> I don't mind to move to git, but IMHO, it's no urgent issue.
> Let's get things out (e.g. concentrate on 2.6.25 merge) right now, and
> then change the infrastructure in the right way.
> BTW, one big annoying thing is that developers have no complete kernel
> tree to access, and thus the patches that touch outside the ALSA
> subdirectory cannot be merged easily.  People often send patches
> fixing together with OSS, etc, and I had to skip them.  So, frankly,
> I'd love to have an access to the whole kernel tree.  But, OTOH, this
> would make harder for other naive guys to give it a try because they
> need to download the big linux kernel tree git.
> Maybe we can think reversely.  Keep the kernel git tree as the primary
> development tree and generate the subset as the alsa-kernel package
> from the kernel tree automatically.  In this way, you can avoid also 
> sign-off messes, too.
> In this scheme, you don't have to stick with stgit.  The normal git
> can handle patches well enough (via occasional rebase), and it's much
> much faster than stgit.  Of course, stgit is still good for small
> number of patches, but it's not true for shared devel trees.

As GIT matured, I can imagine to drop the alsa-kernel repository and 
manage only one ALSA GIT tree. I only hope, that GIT is the final SCM 
system for Linux :-) (At least for several years.)

Ok, let's wait for 2.6.25 and then try to migrate.


Jaroslav Kysela <perex at perex.cz>
Linux Kernel Sound Maintainer
ALSA Project, Red Hat, Inc.

More information about the Alsa-devel mailing list