[FFmpeg-devel] Who is against GIT now? (Was: [RFC] libswscale into the FFmpeg SVN repo)
Mon Apr 6 16:04:28 CEST 2009
Diego Biurrun wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 06, 2009 at 03:40:22PM +0300, Felipe Contreras wrote:
>> On Mon, Apr 6, 2009 at 9:12 AM, Mike Melanson <mike at multimedia.cx> wrote:
>>> Jason Garrett-Glaser wrote:
>>>> On Sun, Apr 5, 2009 at 11:39 AM, Reimar D?ffinger
>>>> <Reimar.Doeffinger at gmx.de> wrote:
>>>>> On Sun, Apr 05, 2009 at 05:28:40PM +0200, Luca Barbato wrote:
>>>>>> Michael Niedermayer wrote:
>>>>>>> and i belive there is no consensus on a switch to git ...
>>>>>> I just wonder who is against git now...
>>>>> Well, to be honest I no longer see a point for git for a central,
>>>>> master repository, and there are known inconveniences (no usable
>>>>> way to modify commit messages, no simple revision number, all
>>>>> references to revisions in commit messages would break
>>>> x264 seems to be doing just fine continuing to use revision numbers
>>>> with git. A few extra client-side scripts might be useful
>>>> (revision_number_to_git_hash and vice versa), but that's about it.
>>> So git the perfect tool... as long as you write your own magic shell scripts
>>> to work around its shortcomings?
>> If you want to do non-standard things you need your own scripts.
>> Strangely the rest of the world is doing fine with SHA-1 id's.
> Strangely, some of the other distributed revision control systems do
> implement version numbers. At least mercurial and bazaar IIRC, which in
> practice amounts to everyone except git.
git gives you an hash or a revision from the latest tag (see
git-describe), that should be perfectly fine for every purpose and
doesn't have the problems you have with using plain revision numbers in
refer to the git ml why having a plain revision is problematic.
Gentoo Council Member
More information about the ffmpeg-devel