Poll: Do you prefer Git or SVN for LLVM development?

I'm curious to know if the LLVM community is deeply split when it
comes to version control. If you have a second, could you please
vote?

http://poll.pollcode.com/i597kq

Thanks,
Greg

Greg Fitzgerald <garious@gmail.com> writes:

I'm curious to know if the LLVM community is deeply split when it
comes to version control. If you have a second, could you please
vote?

http://poll.pollcode.com/i597kq

The result of this poll has little value in practice. In the past the
project leader stated that the opinions of the most active contributors
outweight the rest of the community. So the poll should be conducted
among the most active N contributors, ignoring the rest.

For starters, I hope the results of this poll can help guide how the
GettingStarted page is written.

http://llvm.org/docs/GettingStarted.html

I'd imagine the most active contributors do not find themselves
referencing this page too often, but as a newcomer, I feel it could
use some work. Git is second class, CMake gets nothing but a passing
reference, and Ninja is not even mentioned. Depending on the results
of this poll, I'd be interested in rewriting it such that Git is the
preferred way to get LLVM, CMake is how you configure it, and that you
can tell CMake to generate any of several build systems including GNU
Make, Ninja or XCode.

Furthermore, should we find that few people use SVN and someone wants
to integrate with a package manager, he or she should feel little
obligation to support two version control systems. Likewise, if a
code-owner wants to introduce a code review tool, he or she should not
have to reduce its functionality to the intersection of the git and
subversion feature sets.

Thanks,
Greg

I'd imagine the most active contributors do not find themselves
referencing this page too often, but as a newcomer, I feel it could
use some work.

This has been in the back of my mind for a while, and I think it is
probably true.
I think that it would be more useful if you did a poll specifically
aimed at new contributors (simple rough criterion: new contributor ===
doesn't have commit access), since as you pointed out, they are the
audience of these documents.

Also, make sure that cfe-dev gets included in the vote. The current
thread is only on llvmdev.

Git is second class, CMake gets nothing but a passing
reference, and Ninja is not even mentioned. Depending on the results
of this poll, I'd be interested in rewriting it such that Git is the
preferred way

Better idea: something like:

Makes sense to me. They can even be four different sections of the same page...

-Chris

Greg Fitzgerald <garious@gmail.com> writes:

I'm curious to know if the LLVM community is deeply split when it
comes to version control. If you have a second, could you please
vote?

http://poll.pollcode.com/i597kq

Thanks Greg.

The last option is vague. I do like that we have both but would prefer
git as the canonical source. So I just picked "git only" even though
that's not really my preference.

                            -David