Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:54573 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 45166 invoked from network); 14 Aug 2011 08:18:54 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 14 Aug 2011 08:18:54 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=lester@lsces.co.uk; spf=permerror; sender-id=unknown Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=lester@lsces.co.uk; sender-id=unknown Received-SPF: error (pb1.pair.com: domain lsces.co.uk from 213.123.26.187 cause and error) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: lester@lsces.co.uk X-Host-Fingerprint: 213.123.26.187 c2beaomr09.btconnect.com Received: from [213.123.26.187] ([213.123.26.187:17999] helo=mail.btconnect.com) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id E2/20-42705-AE4874E4 for ; Sun, 14 Aug 2011 04:18:50 -0400 Received: from host81-138-11-136.in-addr.btopenworld.com (EHLO _10.0.0.4_) ([81.138.11.136]) by c2beaomr09.btconnect.com with ESMTP id DZO09409; Sun, 14 Aug 2011 09:18:47 +0100 (BST) Message-ID: <4E4784E7.9050700@lsces.co.uk> Date: Sun, 14 Aug 2011 09:18:47 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.1.19) Gecko/20110420 SUSE/2.0.14-2.2 SeaMonkey/2.0.14 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: PHP internals References: <4E3F02E8.2050402@sugarcrm.com> <4E450EB1.6090502@lsces.co.uk> <4E456F2F.7030809@sugarcrm.com> <4E45755F.3020005@lsces.co.uk> <4E4578B6.6050708@sugarcrm.com> <4E45A2BD.7060506@lsces.co.uk> <4E45AFDF.9000001@sugarcrm.com> <4E45B6A9.9080607@lsces.co.uk> <4E46F26E.1000607@garfieldtech.com> In-Reply-To: <4E46F26E.1000607@garfieldtech.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mirapoint-IP-Reputation: reputation=Fair-1, source=Queried, refid=tid=0001.0A0B0301.4E4784E7.0017, actions=tag X-Junkmail-Premium-Raw: score=7/50, refid=2.7.2:2011.8.14.64815:17:7.586, ip=81.138.11.136, rules=__MOZILLA_MSGID, __HAS_MSGID, __SANE_MSGID, __USER_AGENT, __MIME_VERSION, __TO_MALFORMED_2, __BOUNCE_CHALLENGE_SUBJ, __BOUNCE_NDR_SUBJ_EXEMPT, __CT, __CT_TEXT_PLAIN, __CTE, __ANY_URI, __URI_NO_MAILTO, __CP_URI_IN_BODY, BODYTEXTP_SIZE_3000_LESS, BODY_SIZE_2000_2999, __MIME_TEXT_ONLY, RDNS_GENERIC_POOLED, BODY_SIZE_5000_LESS, RDNS_SUSP_GENERIC, RDNS_SUSP, BODY_SIZE_7000_LESS X-Junkmail-Status: score=10/50, host=c2beaomr09.btconnect.com X-Junkmail-Signature-Raw: score=unknown, refid=str=0001.0A0B0201.4E4784E7.00AE:SCFSTAT14830815,ss=1,fgs=0, ip=0.0.0.0, so=2010-07-22 22:03:31, dmn=2009-09-10 00:05:08, mode=multiengine X-Junkmail-IWF: false Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Choosing a distributed version control system for PHP (or not). Call for Participation. From: lester@lsces.co.uk (Lester Caine) Larry Garfield wrote: > Submodules may make sense for PHP/PECL. I'm not sure. That would > likely take the form of a series of repositories, one for each PECL > module, much the way Drupal has for its modules. Then the PHP core > repository would include a submodule reference to the PECL modules that > were considered "in core" at any given time. Moving a module into/out > of PHP itself is then just a matter of adding/removing submodule > references. (Drupal does not do that currently for its core-packaged > modules, but in theory we could.) There are large areas of the core of PHP which are naturally submodules ( subrepo in hg ). Currently we can all build PHP only using those extensions that we need. When I build my own versions, everything db wise other than Firebird is switched off, so all of the extensions that Linux distributions provide as individually loaded modules are naturally submodules in the core structure? Currently I only bother about code in the modules I actually use, so being able to build my own superproject direct from the repo would be useful and I can now even build that on windows. hg can equally do all of the same stuff as git with all the same points being made. I don't see github as being any + for git simply because I think one of the developments has to be, as Larry says, a privately managed DVCS system so that the access control can be maintained? ( A year ago votes on other projects choose git simply because of github :( ) At that point I do think that hg's design and plugin structure makes it a lot easier to expand? Certainly when it comes to maintaining the Karma system. If people then want a git view as well that can be generated as a mirror? I'm not sure that git supports the same level of interoperability as hg, bazaar and the others, many of which transparently read git repos. But I think that submodule/subrepo is an area where the cross DVCS functionality starts to fall apart. Currently I build an hg superproject calling each git repo rather than using a git repo with submodules. This may be why git wins out again for the base since hg is a lot happier to simply talk to that than the other way around? The only real disadvantage to hg is having to handle python code to maintain it, people might start converting from PHP ;) Although phphgadmin is a start to improving the php interface support and could be a good start at a fully PHP managed interface to a PHP repo? -- Lester Caine - G8HFL ----------------------------- Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk// Firebird - http://www.firebirdsql.org/index.php