Manuel M T Chakravarty wrote:
From what you are saying, it seems that one "advantage" of git (in-place branch switching) is not going to be useful to GHC in any case (because we use nested repositories).
As far as I can tell, in-place branches are not a lot of use to us compared to just having separate checkouts for each local branch. For one thing, having separate source trees lets you keep multiple builds, whereas with in-place branches you can only have one build at a time, and switching branches probably requires a complete rebuild. However, I think I am convinced that using in-place branches for the master repo makes sense. That way we don't need to publish the names of new branches when we make them, and everyone can easily see which branches of GHC are available from the main repo. Cheers, Simon