Re: [edk2] [PATCH] Fix broken IA32 Microsoft assembler code in QemuFwCfgLib.

Subject: Re: [edk2] [PATCH] Fix broken IA32 Microsoft assembler code in QemuFwCfgLib.

From: Andrew Fish <>

To: Jordan Justen <>

Date: 2013-01-29 00:54:02

On Jan 28, 2013, at 2:29 PM, Jordan Justen  wrote:

> On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 1:50 PM, Andrew Fish  wrote:
>> On Jan 28, 2013, at 1:45 PM, David Woodhouse  wrote:
>>> On Mon, 2013-01-28 at 13:13 -0800, Jordan Justen wrote:
>>>> Unfortunately, in general there does not appear to be much
>>>> dissatisfaction with svn in the community.
>>> Perhaps that's because there isn't *enough* pulling of work between
>>> trees going on. Subversion is fundamentally unsuited for the kind of
>>> collaboration that *should* be happening with the various users of this
>>> as a base tree...
>> Why is a mirror required? I thought it is possible to do these ops directly?
>> git svn rebase
>> git svn dcommit
> The initial git-svn clone is quite slow compared to git clone.

Yea we cheat an check in a zip of the tree to get folks started. We could do that with edk2. 

> git svn fetch/rebase is also slower than git fetch.

I don't think we would notice the speed difference given the current rate of changes. 

>> Then you can have your local master git branch follow the edk2 svn and do your work in local git branches.
> Yes, git-svn is great for working on your own branches when using svn
> on the server.
> But, git-svn has a tendency for individual's trees to think they are
> different, when they are not. (Perhaps the individual will setup git
> svn in a slightly different way, or other strangeness with git-svn.)

Well that would be a reason to standardize it for the edk2.

> It also creates a different version of the commits, since svn metadata
> has some limitations.  (For example, no author/committer concept.)

I don't understand what you mean? There is only one version of remote commits and that is svn revision based. Locally you the git hashes. A `git rebase -i` collapse all the changes on a branch into a single svn commit. 

> Anyway, git-svn generally just does not work quite as well for
> multiple people to share branches.

You can track a remote svn branch, just like the TOT, but is still an svn branch. 

>> Is there something about sorceforge that makes this not possible?
> No, there is no issue with using git-svn on sourceforge. The git
> mirror uses git-svn.
> There are just inconveniences due to git-svn and just svn in general.

I guess the issue is you still have to "think like svn" since it is the remote repository. My brain is not fully converted to git, so making the local branches easy to deal with is worth it to me.



> -Jordan

Master Visual Studio, SharePoint, SQL, ASP.NET, C# 2012, HTML5, CSS,
MVC, Windows 8 Apps, JavaScript and much more. Keep your skills current
with LearnDevNow - 3,200 step-by-step video tutorials by Microsoft
MVPs and experts. ON SALE this month only -- learn more at:
edk2-devel mailing list