[Kde-scm-interest] Have we arrived to a dead end?

[Oswald Buddenhagen]

On Fri, Feb 12, 2010 at 06:28:29PM +0100, Riccardo Iaconelli wrote:
> To me it looks like we just need to be able to move a folder from repo
> A to repo B without loosing history.
>
moving is just one aspect. but even that is not at all as simple as you
imagine:
- the history at the new location should be accessible. that's simple -
  just use subtree merge.
- one should not have to resort to a different repository to actually
  checkout an older version. you can't do that with a subtree merge.
- the actual data should not be duplicated. the repositories will be
  large enough as is. that's the antithesis of a subtree merge.

you can't have that without splitting up and managing the pieces via a
versioned meta repository.

> This was the only issue I can remember brought up by the solution of non 
> splitting modules.
> 
i can remember more:
- git speed
- merge conflicts
- side effects of fixing history

oh, and the missed chance to finally make libraries and apps
self-contained. i'm hearing all kinds of moaning about the expected
dependency mess. the fact is, that what we have *now* is a mess, a
manifestation of collective laziness, something which bites everyone who
doesn't want the package deal for some reason.