231–240 of 287 posts
Does this article imply that Microsoft itself is also moving towards Git? Instead of e.g. using their own product like TFS?
I'm a Microsoft employee on the Git team. Microsoft is moving to Git and we use Team Services / TFS as our Git server for all private repositories. GitHub is only used for OSS since that's where the OSS community is.
Quite nice use of C# and C++/CX for a virtual system implementation.
This is similar to what Google uses internally. See http://cacm.acm.org/magazines/2016/7/204032-why-google-store... : "Most developers access Piper through a system called Clients in the Cloud, or CitC, which consists of a cloud-based storage backend and a Linux-only FUSE13 file system. Developers see their workspaces as directories in the file system, including their changes overlaid on top of the full Piper reposit…
Holy cow, it sounds like they reinvented Clearcase!
ClearCase did what a lot of Enterprise companies needed at the time, and most importantly, it created hooks, that were mostly too difficult to remove. Once you create deep integration with ClearCase, you are very much committed to using it long term.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm a Microsoft employee on the Git team. We do have a distributed, caching, incremental build system and a distributed test system. Right now, they're completely internal - like Google. They're called CloudBuild and CloudTest. They're very fast and no one thinks twice about kicking off a build.
Google employs a distributed, caching, incremental build system and a distributed test system across the majority of their code base. I worked in Windows Store and I can assure you that most people there don't use CloudBuild and CloudTest, let along know what they are. I would be confident in saying the majority of people at Microsoft are in that boat.
Googlers like to joke internally that Google looks like a race car from the outside and like Moving Castle from Hayao Miyazaki'a cartoon from the inside, but that's not the case at all. Comparatively speaking it's a race car inside and out, it's just that the insiders don't know how shitty things are elsewhere.
P.S. I heard Bing is different, but I have no visibility into it, so can't comment.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
to be fair, i cant say that i care if people are fair to a multinational corporation. whether linux fans are right or not they are still only doing whats best for their bottom line. should a company get a trophy for doing what its customers want?
that's a good point. its funny, though, that they have actually started doing a lot of things for PR purposes that i van only imagine that most of their customers couldn't really care less about. for example, the majority of their money still comes from windows and office, but open source and hologram BS impress the most vocal anti-MS voices in the media. my point, though, is that there are other companies that dont…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I still think we need something better than Git, though. It brought some very cool ideas and the inner workings are reasonably understandable, but the UI is atrociously complicated. And yes, dealing with large files is a very sore point. Note that Google and Facebook ran into the same problems Microsoft did, and their solution was to use Mercurial and build similar systems on top of it. Microsoft could've done that…
> Microsoft could've done that too, but instead decided to improve Git, They didn't improve git, they only made this for themselves and for their product users. Git doesn't restrict you to a single operating system.
It's interesting how all the cool things seem to come from Microsoft these days. I still think we need something better than Git, though. It brought some very cool ideas and the inner workings are reasonably understandable, but the UI is atrociously complicated. And yes, dealing with large files is a very sore point. I'd love to see a second attempt at a distributed version control system. But I applaud MS's initiati…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think this would be better the piper+citc. While the virtual filesystem aspect is nice the perforce model is far inferior to git's. (IMO) Of course Google has tools on top of it. But it's not fair to compare a VCS and interface to it to a complete development infrastructure. Hell, with the content addressing of git it would even make it easy to build something similar.
> perforce model is far inferior to git's That's just, like, your opinion, man. There are other bits of infra that integrate with it quite nicely, and would integrate with something like Git quite poorly. One of those things is their code review system. The closest thing I could find to it outside Google is Gerrit, but it's a tremendous pain to set up and use, and it's but a pale shadow of Google's internal tool (Cri…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm a Microsoft employee on the Git team. Microsoft is moving to Git and we use Team Services / TFS as our Git server for all private repositories. GitHub is only used for OSS since that's where the OSS community is.
Any comments on why you picked GitHub (propietary) instead of GitLab (FLOSS) for FLOSS projects?
> that's where the OSS community is
It's also not just the community, but GitHub provides significantly better integration support, than GitLab. Since GitHub has such a robust API, it's easier to create bots and what not, to help better manage large open source projects.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> They didn't improve git, they only made this for themselves and for their product users. Git doesn't restrict you to a single operating system. Given Microsoft's recent form, I'd expect this to appear on Linux before long, and possibly osx too. In any case, it's open source so you could always port it yourself.
I would be surprised. This sort of project is deeply OS-specific. If they wanted to eventually make it cross-platform, they would have started by implementing FUSE on Windows.