Reasons why SQLite does not adopt Git as a version control system – GIGAZINE

Git is a distributed version control system developed for managing Linux kernel source code, and GitHub, which hosts Git repositories, has more than 100 million users. On the other hand, in lightweight SQLite database development, a version control system called Fossil is used instead of Git, and the SQLite development team explains on the official website why they do not use Git.

Why doesn't SQLite use Git
https://sqlite.org/whynotgit.html

You can find out what kind of functionality Fossil has as a version control system by reading the article below.

Review of “Fossil'' that combines Git and GitHub functionality into one binary – GIGAZINE

1: Git does not provide proper situational awareness
If you want to know what changes have been made to SQLite,Schedule screenYou'll see a summary of changes for all branches, and you can open any details you want. You can also check this from your smartphone while you are outside.

On the other hand, GitHub and GitLab do not have equivalent functionality. Closest can be saidNetwork diagramHowever, the downside is that the display is slow and you cannot see the details.Show commitmentIt provides more detailed information, but can only display one branch at a time, making it tedious to see all the recent changes.

Some Git users have installed a third-party graphical viewer to view recent changes, but since they are third-party, they need to be installed and managed separately, and since the repository needs to be synchronized, it is not possible to easily check the project status on a smartphone.

2: Difficulty finding a successor to check in
When using Git, it is easy to track what happened before a particular implementation, but it is difficult to see how the code has changed since a particular implementation. It's not easy. Fossil has the ability to display all check-ins derived from a particular major release, making it easy to check the branch's status on the web.

Furthermore, Fossil's check-in information page has an element called “Context,” which displays previous and subsequent check-in information in chronological order, making it easier for users to understand the situation.

3: A very complex portal
When developing with Git, you need to pay attention to all the items mentioned below.

·Directive work
・Staging area (index)
· Local president
・Local copy of the remote control
・Real remote head

On the other hand, with Fossil, developers only need to think about the working directory and logins while working, which frees up more brain resources for software development.

4: Git does not keep track of previous branch names
Git has a complete commit historyNon-circular prompt グラフ(DAG)However, branch tags are local information and will not be synchronized after the branch is closed. This can make reviewing previous branches painful.

For example, let's say a customer asks you what happened to the previous branch “prefer-coroutine-sort-subquery,” and you answer by looking at the log in your version control system.

In the case of Git, you can see that the last commit was on September 30, 2017, but it doesn't show you what happened after that, which doesn't help much when trying to understand what happened.

In Fossil, it is clear that after the commit on September 30, 2017, it was merged into the “trunk” branch, which is equivalent to the master branch in Git.

While it may be possible to view this information using third-party tools, the fact that you need to use third-party tools to get the information you need may be of little benefit to the platform, and they say it's not good.

5: The portal is difficult to manage
Git is a complex program and requires an installer to deploy Git on your workstation or upgrade to a new version. Also, since setting up a Git server is not easy, many developers use third-party services like GitHub and GitLab to add dependencies to their projects.

Fossil, on the other hand, runs as a standalone binary, so installation is just a matter of passing it through your PATH. In addition to Git functionality, one binary includes GitHub and GitLab functionality, allowing you to use wikis, bug tracking, forums, and more. You can get Fossil Community Server up and running in minutes, and it can run in an environment with lower specifications than servers like GitLab.

With less management, developers can spend more time developing software.

6: Git has a bad user experience
Although Git has a large number of features that allow it to be used in a variety of situations, only a few developers can actually master it. An exaggeration of how difficult Git is for many developers. “To use Git, all you have to do is save and type some commands. If an error occurs, save your work elsewhere and reset the project.''Satirical mangaThere are many developers who find it difficult to use.

Software development is difficult and requires a lot of focus. A good versioning system should help developers, not frustrate them. Git has continued to improve since its introduction, but it still has a long way to go.

For a detailed comparison between Fossil and Git,fossil vs gitYou can check it on the page.