Many hyperlinks are disabled.
Use anonymous login
to enable hyperlinks.
Overview
Comment: | Further enhancements to the whynotgit.html page. |
---|---|
Downloads: | Tarball | ZIP archive |
Timelines: | family | ancestors | descendants | both | branch-3.28 |
Files: | files | file ages | folders |
SHA3-256: |
763fc99770d022f51e8893310208f8ed |
User & Date: | drh 2019-04-30 20:15:33.722 |
Context
2019-04-30
| ||
20:37 | More "whynotgit.html" updates. (check-in: 71cccf3d65 user: drh tags: branch-3.28) | |
20:15 | Further enhancements to the whynotgit.html page. (check-in: 763fc99770 user: drh tags: branch-3.28) | |
2019-04-29
| ||
19:27 | Further clarification to the assert.html document. (check-in: ef3822f76d user: drh tags: branch-3.28) | |
Changes
Changes to pages/whynotgit.in.
︙ | ︙ | |||
9 10 11 12 13 14 15 | [https://git-scm.org|Git] version control system. SQLite uses [https://fossil-scm.org/|Fossil] instead, which is a version control system that was specifically designed and written to support SQLite. <p> | | | > > > > > > > > > > > > > | < > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > | 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 | [https://git-scm.org|Git] version control system. SQLite uses [https://fossil-scm.org/|Fossil] instead, which is a version control system that was specifically designed and written to support SQLite. <p> People often wonder sometimes ask why SQLite does not use the [https://git-scm.org|Git] version control system like everybody else. This article attempts to answer that question. Also, in <a href="#getthecode">section 3</a>, this article provides hints to Git users about how they can easily access the SQLite source code. <p> This article is <u>not</u> a comparison between Fossil and Git. See [https://fossil-scm.org/fossil/doc/trunk/www/fossil-v-git.wiki] for one comparison of the two systems. There are others as well. <p> This article is <u>not</u> advocating that you switch your projects away from Git. You can use whatever version control system you want. If you are perfectly happy with Git, then by all means keep using Git. But, if you are wondering if there isn't something better, then maybe try to understand the perspectives presented below. Use the insights thus obtained to find or write a different and better version control system, or to make improvements to Git. <h2>Edits</h2> <p> This article has been revised multiple times in an attempt to improve clarity, address concerns and misgivings, and to fix errors identified on [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16806114|Hacker News], [https://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/8c2niw/why_sqlite_does_not_use_git/|Reddit] and [https://lobste.rs/s/slcntl/why_sqlite_does_not_use_git|Lobsters]. The complete edit history can be seen at [https://sqlite.org/docsrc/finfo/pages/whynotgit.in]. (Usage hint: Click on any two nodes of the graph in the file history page linked above to see a diff between the two versions.) <h1>A Few Reasons Why SQLite Does Not Use Git</h1> <p> One could summarize the reason why SQLite does not use Git in a single sentence: The lead SQLite developer finds Git to be unpalatable. If you like Git and want to use it, that's great. I would rather use something better. <p> The following are a few of the reasons why I do not like Git: <h2>Git does not provide good situational awareness</h2> <p> When I want to see what has been happening on SQLite (or any of about a dozen other projects that I work on) I visit the [https://sqlite.org/src/timeline|timeline] and in a single screen I can see a quick summary of all the latest changes, on all branches. In a few clicks, I can drill down to see as much detail as I want. I can even do this from a phone. <p> GitHub and GitLab offer nothing comparible. The closest I have found is the [https://github.com/sqlite/sqlite/network|network], which is slow to render (unless it is already cached), does not offer nearly as much details, and scarcely works on mobile. The [https://github.com/sqlite/sqlite/commits/master|commits] view of GitHub provides more detail, renders quickly, and works on mobile, but only shows a single branch at a time, so I cannot easily know if I've seen all of the recent changes. And even if GitHub/GitLab did offer better interfaces, both are third-party services. They are not a core part of Git. Hence, using them introduces yet another dependency into the project. <p> I am told that Git users commonly install third-party graphical viewers for Git, many of which do a better job of showing recent activity on the project. That is great, but these are still more third-party applications that must be installed and managed separately. Many are platform-specific. (One of the better ones, [https://gitup.co/|GitUp], only works on Mac, for example.) All require that you first sync your local repository then bring up their graphical interface on your desktop. And even with all that, I still cannot see what I typically want to see without multiple clicks. Checking on project status from a phone while away from the office is not an option. <h2>Git makes it difficult to find successors (descendents) of a check-in</h2> <p> Git allows you to go backwards in time easily. Given the latest check-in on a branch, Git lets you see all the ancestors of that |
︙ | ︙ | |||
117 118 119 120 121 122 123 | <li> The working directory <li> The "index" or staging area <li> The local head <li> The local copy of the remote head <li> The actual remote head </ol> <p> | | | 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 | <li> The working directory <li> The "index" or staging area <li> The local head <li> The local copy of the remote head <li> The actual remote head </ol> <p> Git commands (and/or options on commands) for moving and comparing content between all of these locations. <p>In contrast, Fossil users only need to think about their working directory and the check-in they are working on. That is 60% less distraction. Every developer has a finite number of brain-cycles. Fossil requires fewer brain-cycles to operate, thus freeing up |
︙ | ︙ | |||
150 151 152 153 154 155 156 | branches tedious. <p> As an example, consider display of a single historical branch of SQLite as rendered by GitHub and by Fossil: <ul> | | | 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 | branches tedious. <p> As an example, consider display of a single historical branch of SQLite as rendered by GitHub and by Fossil: <ul> <li><b>GitHub:</b> [https://github.com/sqlite/sqlite/commits/prefer-coroutine-sort-subquery] <li><b>Fossil:</b> [https://sqlite.org/src/timeline?r=prefer-coroutine-sort-subquery] </ul> <p> The Fossil view clearly shows that the branch was eventually merged back into trunk. It shows where the branch started, and it shows two occasions where changes on trunk were merged into the branch. GitHub shows none of this. In fact, the |
︙ | ︙ | |||
175 176 177 178 179 180 181 | <h2>Git requires more administrative support</h2> <p> Git is complex software. One needs an installer of some kind to put Git on a developer workstation, or to upgrade to a newer version of Git. | | | < < < | > | 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 | <h2>Git requires more administrative support</h2> <p> Git is complex software. One needs an installer of some kind to put Git on a developer workstation, or to upgrade to a newer version of Git. Setting up a Git server is non-trivial, and so most users have to use a third-party service such as GitHub or GitLab, and thus introduce additional (unnecessary) dependencies into the project. <p> In contrast, Fossil is a single standalone binary which is installed by putting it on $PATH. That one binary contains all the functionality of core Git and also GitHub and/or GitLab. It manages a community server with wiki, bug tracking, and forums, provides packaged downloads for consumers, login managements, |
︙ | ︙ | |||
214 215 216 217 218 219 220 | parody site that generates [https://git-man-page-generator.lokaltog.net/|fake git man pages]. <p>Designing software is hard. It takes a lot of focus. A good version control system should provide the developer with assistance, not frustration. Git has gotten better in this regard over the past decade, but it still has a long way to go. | < < | | | > | > > > | | > > > | > | > > > > > > | 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 | parody site that generates [https://git-man-page-generator.lokaltog.net/|fake git man pages]. <p>Designing software is hard. It takes a lot of focus. A good version control system should provide the developer with assistance, not frustration. Git has gotten better in this regard over the past decade, but it still has a long way to go. <a name="getthecode"></a> <h1>A Git-User's Guide To Accessing SQLite Source Code</h1> <p> If you are a devoted Git user, you can still easily access SQLite. This section gives some hints on how to do so. <h2>The Official GitHub Mirror</h2> <p> As of 2019-03-20, there is now an [https://github.com/sqlite/sqlite|official Git mirror] of the SQLite sources on GitHub. <p>The mirror is an incremental export of the [https://sqlite.org/src/timeline|canonical Fossil repository] for SQLite. A cron-job updates the GitHub repository at 17 minutes after the hour, ever hour. This is a one-way, read-only code mirror. No pull requests or changes are accepted via GitHub. The GitHub repository merely copies the content from the Fossil repository. All changes are input via Fossil. <p> The hashes that identify check-ins and files on the Git mirror are different from the hashes in Fossil. There are many reasons for this, chief among them that Fossil uses a SHA3-256 hash whereas Git uses a SHA1 hash. During export, the original Fossil hash for each check-in is added as a footer to check-in comments. To avoid confusion, always use the original Fossil hash, not the Git hash, when referring to SQLite check-ins. <h2>Web Access</h2> <p> The [https://sqlite.org/src/timeline|SQLite Fossil Repository] contains links for downloading a Tarball, ZIP Archive, or [SQLite Archive] for any historical version of SQLite. The URLs for these downloads are |
︙ | ︙ | |||
327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 | Additional documentation on Fossil can be found at [https://fossil-scm.org/fossil/doc/trunk/www/permutedindex.html] <p> Do not be afraid to explore and experiment. Without a log-in you won't be able to push back any changes you make, so you cannot damage the project. <h1>See Also</h1> <p>Other pages that talk about Fossil and Git include: <ul> <li><p>[https://fossil-scm.org/fossil/doc/trunk/www/fossil-v-git.wiki|Fossil vs. Git] <li><p>[https://www.fossil-scm.org/fossil/doc/trunk/www/quotes.wiki|What others say about Fossil and Git] </ul> | > > > > > > > > > > > > > > | 386 387 388 389 390 391 392 393 394 395 396 397 398 399 400 401 402 403 404 405 406 407 408 409 410 411 412 413 414 | Additional documentation on Fossil can be found at [https://fossil-scm.org/fossil/doc/trunk/www/permutedindex.html] <p> Do not be afraid to explore and experiment. Without a log-in you won't be able to push back any changes you make, so you cannot damage the project. <h2>Verifying Source Code Integrity</h2> <p> If you need to verify that the SQLite source code that you have is authentic and has not been modified in any way (perhaps by an adversary) that can be done using a few simple command-line tools. At the root of the SQLite source tree is a file named "manifest". The manifest file contains the name of every other file in the source tree together with either a SHA1 or SHA3-256 hash for that file. (SHA1 is used for older files and SHA3-256 for newer files.) You can write a script to extract these hashes and verify them against the source code files. The hash name for the check-in is just the SHA3-256 hash of the "manifest" file itself. <h1>See Also</h1> <p>Other pages that talk about Fossil and Git include: <ul> <li><p>[https://fossil-scm.org/fossil/doc/trunk/www/fossil-v-git.wiki|Fossil vs. Git] <li><p>[https://www.fossil-scm.org/fossil/doc/trunk/www/quotes.wiki|What others say about Fossil and Git] </ul> |