From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on inbox.vuxu.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.3 required=5.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,HTML_MESSAGE, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SUBJ_ALL_CAPS autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (minnie.tuhs.org [45.79.103.53]) by inbox.vuxu.org (OpenSMTPD) with ESMTP id 7a32e1eb for ; Thu, 12 Sep 2019 14:36:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix, from userid 112) id 5BCE194811; Fri, 13 Sep 2019 00:36:36 +1000 (AEST) Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 07F4394797; Fri, 13 Sep 2019 00:36:07 +1000 (AEST) Authentication-Results: minnie.tuhs.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key; unprotected) header.d=ccc.com header.i=@ccc.com header.b="eQTqSfM0"; dkim-atps=neutral Received: by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix, from userid 112) id E71EF94797; Fri, 13 Sep 2019 00:36:05 +1000 (AEST) Received: from mail-wr1-f51.google.com (mail-wr1-f51.google.com [209.85.221.51]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A968293D35 for ; Fri, 13 Sep 2019 00:36:01 +1000 (AEST) Received: by mail-wr1-f51.google.com with SMTP id g7so28818965wrx.2 for ; Thu, 12 Sep 2019 07:36:01 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ccc.com; s=google; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=25diWIZyhpqZj20TXmemScEjEnpnKJvHUuWrf+27Ryc=; b=eQTqSfM0BdqmRxYWx6jtxrXqt6TeuUcwgoiYWeosn2JgcWYMpBjcCvL69fs5/pAGvM /jX+Slj6msyMdzlyqNmiULegOWQGZJ0FoLCFF1M5j7+sfVnaayDzxGq4gNzegGmYaWYT IhjFQS/p/D8D+EBQzx6HhZrAVG85SK3y7AMEY= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=25diWIZyhpqZj20TXmemScEjEnpnKJvHUuWrf+27Ryc=; b=WNZpOe6LSqD+8MUu7m+JJZHVZs2RJBggasixZDxQAS6cN4eazzlzX3M8mT2iCm4JPk PcdqmyjQ1VzsYatGxpxtP+KYKTCGnkc0w8gsCnBdgmEawzCXpk2uSz9aRpMQRo0VEpLa fiwh7Ua6Q+jbVslOq1PVuhmx1mVCe4Vc3RdPh38fhVOs8lyenicT9QKUX63/AuV0htPE m/JiW7gDTAHUyYad6YSBmRr8WXE/pZnq5l/32yI1nqudeeqN6vYm66WaEc55itm6yWNY 4vhloKkzIGpQI/nT3FB7CuTc81Zeq4Cs3/F4lsb7fEkTT3vP0AmR1uc5bpoORK3XwFfD 5Wxw== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAWyssKONc9lz9vxqh+b37XaI6yJmvJomHL5ccuqfV0N//QMbmA1 Gn82Wc/4ZbhWjki5mMqT707nU80xviZToAflqv1iOUm3IzL4+g== X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqzhB2dbQHvW/cCOKEKp/jZBjXY32XRFNQqxhwGluLGV6CvQPjy0yoOy3OVIWiIQ8VBLaHKkW26zXSJ5Q0VbmT8= X-Received: by 2002:a5d:640f:: with SMTP id z15mr33634373wru.217.1568298960053; Thu, 12 Sep 2019 07:36:00 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20190911181101.GF3143@mcvoy.com> <20190912034346.GJ2046@mcvoy.com> <20190912043308.GL2046@mcvoy.com> <03956472-B6A1-4E83-B2F1-0FE855C75C15@jctaylor.com> In-Reply-To: <03956472-B6A1-4E83-B2F1-0FE855C75C15@jctaylor.com> From: Clem Cole Date: Thu, 12 Sep 2019 10:35:32 -0400 Message-ID: To: Larry McVoy , "tuhs@minnie.tuhs.org" Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000006a8c6f05925c0e2c" Subject: Re: [TUHS] SCCS X-BeenThere: tuhs@minnie.tuhs.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26 Precedence: list List-Id: The Unix Heritage Society mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: tuhs-bounces@minnie.tuhs.org Sender: "TUHS" --0000000000006a8c6f05925c0e2c Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Like most things in life, what you value tends to make one thing more important than another when you consider any object. This is why programs like editors; programming languages; and in this case, file revision management software, gets such visceral responses from so many of us. And like many programs and subsystems, as deficiencies become more obvious/acute with a program, when and how they are addressed also play into that value. Thus, I think it comes back to *use case* for everyone. What am I protecting with this subsystem and how does it affect me? Frankly, the high order bit for me, is usually protection from my own silliness (most important), how easy/natural it is to use/fit into my workflow(next in importance); followed by accidental/on-purpose changes happening by my friends/coworkers 'behind my back'(important); how merges are handled when I'm in a group setting; and IF AND ONLY IF I'm using the tool kit to protect IP for a 'product', how easy it is to support 'releases' past/current/in-development at the same time. The truth is, when I'm leading product development, that last one moves up a few places, although I know that if the 'fit' or ease of using the tool is not nearly #1, some members of the team will not use said tool in the planned and expected manner - so I think I will tend to value 'ease of use' as the most important attribute for me. Truth is SCCS and from what I know of BitKeeper, has always met my criteria, certainly for simple programs and even for documents like papers and books. As I said, its what I use day to day (thank you Marc and team). While I learned the direct get/admin/delta/prs commands, calling them via Eric's "sccs(ucb)" front-end 'fixed' the harder to use part of things. Frankly, I have aliases 'get' to be 'sccs get' and the like. I was at Tektronix and like many when Tichey released RCS by itself, Eric's sccs(ucb) command was not available to me, so it seemed simpler and I was attracted to it. But I quickly went to UCB and was re-introduced to SCCS using Eric's front-end and I found the difference was a nit. SCCS was what we used, so that became my go-to and has been for a long time. SCCS was our systems at Masscomp, Stellar and later DEC (although DEC for OSF/1 switched to another system whose name I forget which came from OSF). At LCC, we used what the customer used, so we got to see a lot of them ;-) That said, when Thinking Machines released CVS-II (on top of RCS) it did seem like the cvs merge management and production tags tended to be the easier/a good thing. When we used that system for an HP project at LCC, I will say, the Thinking Machine crew had fixed the two issues I had struggles with SCCS**. I used cvs again for a few other projects including two start-ups later. Since that time, I have been given Mercurial, SVN, and git. I'll ignore the first two as they seem to have fallen from grace. I personally, find git extremely heavyweight and only deal with it because I have too thanks so linux pushing it into so many FOSS projects. I can and do have to use it, but my experience is that we fight the tool constantly and I wonder if we are ahead or behind. The git system supposed to be great for merges and so-called 'pull requests' and I can see if what you value is being able to grab something from someone else - *i.e.* what Linus does daily (merge lots of peoples 'suggestions') and it probably does make it easier for Linus. But .... I can say in a product setting, I have observed it is messy to keep track of specific versions of things that make up a 'product. For instance, I would like to be able to query, get me all the sources that make of the 'Intel Parallel Studio, Cluster Edition' (I don't think it can be done!! At least at DEC, when we released Ultrix, we put a tag into the DB and keep a DB around for every file we used for the build. There was a script that could be run, that get do an 'sccs get' against every file and we could rebuild everything (VAX or PMAX) and it even included some of the 'layered products' that the OS team controlled. So, my observation at Intel, is we have more people wasting backed time on 'maintaining our common pools' here than we ever did at DEC or at any of start-ups. As a sr person, I must say hmmmmm Anyway - that's my 2 cents. ** Although, I'll believe Larry when he says he fixed said SCCS deficiencies in Bitkeeper. I will say after a quick examination of doc and his emails, it does sound like he picked up some of the good ideas from other systems, but I can not say I have tried it. --0000000000006a8c6f05925c0e2c Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Like most things in life, what you value tends to make = one thing more important than another when you consider any object.=C2=A0 T= his is why programs like editors; programming languages; and in this case, = file revision management software, gets such visceral responses from so man= y of us.=C2=A0 =C2=A0And like many programs and subsystems, as deficiencies= become more obvious/acute with a program, when and how they are addressed = also play into that value.

Thus, I think it comes back= to use case for everyone.=C2=A0 What am I protecting with th= is subsystem and how does it affect me?

Frankly, the h= igh order bit for me, is usually protection from my own silliness (most imp= ortant), how easy/natural it is to use/fit into my workflow(next in importa= nce); followed by accidental/on-purpose changes happening=C2=A0by my friend= s/coworkers 'behind my back'(important); how merges are handled whe= n I'm in a group setting; and IF AND ONLY IF I'm using the tool kit= to protect IP for a 'product', how easy it is to support 'rele= ases' past/current/in-development at the same time.

<= div class=3D"gmail_default" style=3D"font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif= ">The truth is, when I'm leading product development, that last one mov= es up a few places, although I know that if the 'fit' or ease of us= ing the tool is not nearly #1, some members of the team will not use said t= ool in the planned and expected manner - so I think I will tend to value &#= 39;ease of=C2=A0use' as the most important=C2=A0attribute=C2=A0for me.

Truth is SCCS and from what I know of BitKeeper, has al= ways met my criteria, certainly for simple programs and even for documents = like papers and books. As I said, its what I use day to day (thank you Marc= and team).=C2=A0 While I learned the direct get/admin/delta/prs commands, = calling them via Eric's "sccs(ucb)" front-end 'fixed'= the harder to use part of things.=C2=A0 Frankly, I have aliases 'get&#= 39; to be 'sccs get' and the like.=C2=A0=C2=A0


I was at=C2=A0Tektronix and like many when Tichey released RC= S by itself, Eric's sccs(ucb) command was not available to me,=C2=A0so = it seemed simpler and I was attracted to it.=C2=A0 But I quickly went to UC= B and was re-introduced to SCCS using Eric's front-end and I found the = difference was a nit.=C2=A0 =C2=A0SCCS was what we used, so that became my = go-to and has been for a long time.=C2=A0

SCCS was our= systems at Masscomp, Stellar and later DEC (although DEC for OSF/1 switche= d to another system whose name I forget which came from OSF).=C2=A0 =C2=A0A= t LCC, we used what the customer used, so we got to see a lot of them ;-)= =C2=A0

That said,=C2=A0when Thinking Machines released= CVS-II (on top of RCS) it did seem like the cvs merge management and produ= ction tags tended to be the easier/a good thing.=C2=A0 =C2=A0When we used t= hat system for an HP project at LCC, I will say, the Thinking Machine crew = had fixed the two issues I had struggles with SCCS**.=C2=A0 =C2=A0I used cv= s again for a few other projects including two start-ups later.
=C2=A0
Since that time, I have been given Mercurial, SVN, and= git. I'll ignore the first two as they seem to have fallen from grace.= I personally, find git extremely heavyweight and only deal with it because= I have too thanks so linux pushing it into so many FOSS projects.=C2=A0 I = can and do have to use it, but my experience is that we fight the tool cons= tantly and I wonder if we are ahead or behind.=C2=A0 The git system suppose= d to be great for merges and so-called 'pull requests' and I can se= e if what you value is being able to grab something from someone else -=C2= =A0i.e. what Linus does daily (merge lots of peoples 'suggestion= s') and it probably does make it easier for Linus.=C2=A0 But .... I can= say in a product setting, I have observed it is messy to keep track of spe= cific versions of things that make up a 'product.=C2=A0 For instance, I= would like to be able to query, get me all the sources that make of the &#= 39;Intel Parallel Studio, Cluster Edition'=C2=A0 (I don't think it = can be done!!

At least at DEC, when we released Ultrix= , we put a tag into the DB and keep a DB around for every file we used for = the build.=C2=A0 There was a script that could be run, that get do an '= sccs get' against every file and we could rebuild everything (VAX or PM= AX) and it even included some of the 'layered products' that the OS= team controlled.

So, my observation at Intel, is we= =C2=A0have more people wasting backed time on 'maintaining our common p= ools' here than we ever did at DEC or at any of start-ups.=C2=A0 =C2=A0= As a sr person, I must say hmmmmm

Anyway - that'= s my 2 cents.=C2=A0=C2=A0


** Although, I&= #39;ll believe Larry when he says he fixed said SCCS deficiencies in Bitkee= per.=C2=A0 I will say after a quick examination of doc and his emails, it d= oes sound like he picked up some of the good ideas from other systems, but = I can not say I have tried it.=C2=A0 =C2=A0


--0000000000006a8c6f05925c0e2c--