[OT] A little rant about DVCS
Here is a little rant about DVCS that I came across: Unorthodocs: Abandon your DVCS and Return to Sanity http://bitquabit.com/post/unorthodocs-abandon-your-dvcs-and-return-to-sanity... What struck my attention was that this guys (1) knows what he is talking about and (2) recognises both Smalltalk and Monticello explicitly as ancestors ! This also shows that not all is fun and jolly in git(hub) land. Sven
On 04 Mar 2015, at 09:22, Sven Van Caekenberghe <sven@stfx.eu> wrote:
Here is a little rant about DVCS that I came across:
Unorthodocs: Abandon your DVCS and Return to Sanity
http://bitquabit.com/post/unorthodocs-abandon-your-dvcs-and-return-to-sanity...
What struck my attention was that this guys (1) knows what he is talking about and (2) recognises both Smalltalk and Monticello explicitly as ancestors !
Benjamin is (or maybe was until very recently) on this list. He know what he is talking about because he worked on Kiln http://www.fogcreek.com/kiln/ Marcus
2015-03-04 9:22 GMT+01:00 Sven Van Caekenberghe <sven@stfx.eu>:
Here is a little rant about DVCS that I came across:
Unorthodocs: Abandon your DVCS and Return to Sanity
http://bitquabit.com/post/unorthodocs-abandon-your-dvcs-and-return-to-sanity...
What struck my attention was that this guys (1) knows what he is talking about and (2) recognises both Smalltalk and Monticello explicitly as ancestors !
Interestingly, one of the things he is discussing is the versionning of external data (blobs).
This also shows that not all is fun and jolly in git(hub) land.
Of course. We do with what we have (and what is popular) :) Thierry
Le 4 mars 2015 09:51, "Thierry Goubier" <thierry.goubier@gmail.com> a écrit :
2015-03-04 9:22 GMT+01:00 Sven Van Caekenberghe <sven@stfx.eu>:
Here is a little rant about DVCS that I came across:
Unorthodocs: Abandon your DVCS and Return to Sanity
http://bitquabit.com/post/unorthodocs-abandon-your-dvcs-and-return-to-sanity...
What struck my attention was that this guys (1) knows what he is talking
about and (2) recognises both Smalltalk and Monticello explicitly as ancestors !
Interestingly, one of the things he is discussing is the versionning of external data (blobs).
This also shows that not all is fun and jolly in git(hub) land.
Of course. We do with what we have (and what is popular) :)
Still, the full local github history, the ability to push to several repos and the surrounding ecosystem makes it very fine. No one is forced to branch on every single feature... I have been coming back from that for example. master and develop with a couple tags do the trick. Phil
Thierry
2015-03-04 10:16 GMT+01:00 phil@highoctane.be <phil@highoctane.be>:
Le 4 mars 2015 09:51, "Thierry Goubier" <thierry.goubier@gmail.com> a écrit :
2015-03-04 9:22 GMT+01:00 Sven Van Caekenberghe <sven@stfx.eu>:
Here is a little rant about DVCS that I came across:
Unorthodocs: Abandon your DVCS and Return to Sanity
http://bitquabit.com/post/unorthodocs-abandon-your-dvcs-and-return-to-sanity...
What struck my attention was that this guys (1) knows what he is
talking about and (2) recognises both Smalltalk and Monticello explicitly as ancestors !
Interestingly, one of the things he is discussing is the versionning of external data (blobs).
This also shows that not all is fun and jolly in git(hub) land.
Of course. We do with what we have (and what is popular) :)
Still, the full local github history, the ability to push to several repos and the surrounding ecosystem makes it very fine. No one is forced to branch on every single feature... I have been coming back from that for example.
I agree. What I'd add to the git benefits is a fairly good merge algorithm as well.
master and develop with a couple tags do the trick.
One of the good things is the flexibility it offers. Thierry
Phil
Thierry
Thanks for the article Sven. As I understand it, git became popular not because it was a DCVS, but because it made it easy to branch, try something, and merge back (or continue in that branch). It is, branching was more important than distribution. However it is good to hear somebody saying things in this direction, otherwise, groupshift happens (as it did). This paragraph is independent of whatever he is talking about and I like to remark it: "Hereâs a tip: if you say somethingâs hard, and everyone starts screaming at youâsometimes literallyâthat itâs easy, then itâs really hard. The people yelling at you are trying desperately to pretend like it was easy so they donât feel like an idiot for how long it took them to figure things out. This in turn makes you feel like an idiot for taking so long to grasp the âeasyâ concept, so you happily pay it forward, and we come to one of the two great Emperor Has No Clothes moments in computing." Regards! Esteban A. Maringolo 2015-03-04 6:30 GMT-03:00 Thierry Goubier <thierry.goubier@gmail.com>:
2015-03-04 10:16 GMT+01:00 phil@highoctane.be <phil@highoctane.be>:
Le 4 mars 2015 09:51, "Thierry Goubier" <thierry.goubier@gmail.com> a écrit :
2015-03-04 9:22 GMT+01:00 Sven Van Caekenberghe <sven@stfx.eu>:
Here is a little rant about DVCS that I came across:
Unorthodocs: Abandon your DVCS and Return to Sanity
http://bitquabit.com/post/unorthodocs-abandon-your-dvcs-and-return-to-sanity...
What struck my attention was that this guys (1) knows what he is talking about and (2) recognises both Smalltalk and Monticello explicitly as ancestors !
Interestingly, one of the things he is discussing is the versionning of external data (blobs).
This also shows that not all is fun and jolly in git(hub) land.
Of course. We do with what we have (and what is popular) :)
Still, the full local github history, the ability to push to several repos and the surrounding ecosystem makes it very fine. No one is forced to branch on every single feature... I have been coming back from that for example.
I agree. What I'd add to the git benefits is a fairly good merge algorithm as well.
master and develop with a couple tags do the trick.
One of the good things is the flexibility it offers.
Thierry
Phil
Thierry
On Wed, Mar 4, 2015 at 12:47 PM, Esteban A. Maringolo <emaringolo@gmail.com> wrote:
Thanks for the article Sven.
As I understand it, git became popular not because it was a DCVS, but because it made it easy to branch, try something, and merge back (or continue in that branch). It is, branching was more important than distribution.
However it is good to hear somebody saying things in this direction, otherwise, groupshift happens (as it did).
This paragraph is independent of whatever he is talking about and I like to remark it: "Hereâs a tip: if you say somethingâs hard, and everyone starts screaming at youâsometimes literallyâthat itâs easy, then itâs really hard. The people yelling at you are trying desperately to pretend like it was easy so they donât feel like an idiot for how long it took them to figure things out. This in turn makes you feel like an idiot for taking so long to grasp the âeasyâ concept, so you happily pay it forward, and we come to one of the two great Emperor Has No Clothes moments in computing."
Nobody screamed at me but some things in Smalltalk I find really hard. Powerful, certainely. But hard. Until I have been wrapping my mind around it. Then it feels easy. Because I now understands. That's no reason to scream on people. Since there is still a lot to grasp :-) Phil
Regards!
Esteban A. Maringolo
2015-03-04 6:30 GMT-03:00 Thierry Goubier <thierry.goubier@gmail.com>:
2015-03-04 10:16 GMT+01:00 phil@highoctane.be <phil@highoctane.be>:
Le 4 mars 2015 09:51, "Thierry Goubier" <thierry.goubier@gmail.com> a écrit :
2015-03-04 9:22 GMT+01:00 Sven Van Caekenberghe <sven@stfx.eu>:
Here is a little rant about DVCS that I came across:
Unorthodocs: Abandon your DVCS and Return to Sanity
http://bitquabit.com/post/unorthodocs-abandon-your-dvcs-and-return-to-sanity...
What struck my attention was that this guys (1) knows what he is talking about and (2) recognises both Smalltalk and Monticello explicitly as ancestors !
Interestingly, one of the things he is discussing is the versionning of external data (blobs).
This also shows that not all is fun and jolly in git(hub) land.
Of course. We do with what we have (and what is popular) :)
Still, the full local github history, the ability to push to several repos and the surrounding ecosystem makes it very fine. No one is forced to branch on every single feature... I have been coming back from that for example.
I agree. What I'd add to the git benefits is a fairly good merge algorithm as well.
master and develop with a couple tags do the trick.
One of the good things is the flexibility it offers.
Thierry
Phil
Thierry
Really nice blog post! I like the queries on pull requests ... This is fun because his remarks of people yelling at me when I said that Git is hard is soooo true :) What I learn is that we should not put all our future on a single techno. Stef Le 4/3/15 09:22, Sven Van Caekenberghe a écrit :
Here is a little rant about DVCS that I came across:
Unorthodocs: Abandon your DVCS and Return to Sanity
http://bitquabit.com/post/unorthodocs-abandon-your-dvcs-and-return-to-sanity...
What struck my attention was that this guys (1) knows what he is talking about and (2) recognises both Smalltalk and Monticello explicitly as ancestors !
This also shows that not all is fun and jolly in git(hub) land.
Sven
participants (6)
-
Esteban A. Maringolo -
Marcus Denker -
phil＠highoctane.be -
stepharo -
Sven Van Caekenberghe -
Thierry Goubier