1. 15

    Tangential comment: I assume Google funded this in some way (either by paying a person to do it or offering money to the open source project). But, AFAIK, Git is not a Google project so I don’t really like that this introduction is coming from their blog as if it’s theirs. Maybe there is the official release somewhere else? Maybe I’m missing something and all this is kosher.

    1. 14

      Most of the Git core team is employed by Google to work on Git. The maintainer Junio Hamano is a Google employee whose job is to work on Git.

      That is why this announcement is happening on the Google blog.

      1. 8

        Git 2.18 is not yet released, so this is more of call for testing. Google-specific part here is that you can test against googlesource.com, because Google deployed v2 enabled server.

        1. 11

          It reads like an official announcement on behalf of the git project though, while not being on a git-related domain, which is what is somewhat surprising. Well, the first sentence does. The rest of the post wouldn’t have raised my eyebrow, but this part also confused me on first read regarding on whose behalf “we” is speaking here (Google? git? both?):

          Today we announce Git protocol version 2, a major update of Git’s wire protocol…

          1. 3

            Google employs many git and mercurial developers. Very few organizations do source control on the scale of Google so it makes sense for them to fund developers of the tools they use.

            1. 10

              Myself, and I don’t think @mjn, are disagreeing that Google does a lot with source control and probably spends a lot of money on supporting git. My concern/issue is that git is not a Google project so it doesn’t quite feel right that, what feels like an official announcements should be on their website.

              1. 3

                A google employee wanted to share some open source work they’d been doing so they used a company blog. That doesn’t seem weird to me.

                edit: I guess it’s worth adding that it wasn’t really announced in this blog post. You could have seen the discussions about this if you followed the git mailing lists.

                1. 6

                  Google could have done a better job in this post explaining the relationship between Google, the author and the git project. One phrase would have made a ton of difference. For example, “I am John Foo, a Google employee and a member of the git core team” (with a link to some sort of proof on the git website)

                  1. 2

                    Well, there is such phrase, but at the end:

                    By Brandon Williams, Git-core Team

        2. 1

          Did you mean Git is not a google project?

          1. 1

            Fixed, thanks.