I prefer working with GIT, and agree with the points already made in this thread about its benefits. I'm not sure how much pain a meaningful transition will cause - from that perspective, starting with the components is a great idea.
+1 Regards, Bill On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 8:24 AM, Bernd Bohmann <bernd.bohm...@googlemail.com > wrote: > Thanks Mark > > gitflow is not solving any technical problem. It's just more complicated > and it's looks good from a high level perspective. > > Regards > > Bernd > > On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 2:02 PM, Mark Struberg <strub...@yahoo.de> wrote: > >> gitflow is pure pita ;) >> It basically only works for companies where you have a single manager who >> decides what goes in and what not. >> >> But GIT != gitflow. gitflow has nothing to do with the GIT scm itself, >> but is just a fancy name for a development process with an explicit >> build-branch and a build-master. >> >> +0 on moving to GIT. >> SVN works good enough imo, but GIT ofc also would work. >> >> LIeGrue, >> strub >> >> > Am 19.04.2017 um 12:57 schrieb Kito Mann <kito.m...@virtua.com>: >> > >> > +1 >> > >> > Wha's wrong with GitFlow? >> > >> > ___ >> > >> > Kito D. Mann | @kito99 | Author, JSF in Action >> > Web Components, Polymer, JSF, PrimeFaces, Java EE training and >> consulting >> > Virtua, Inc. | virtua.tech >> > JSFCentral.com | @jsfcentral | knowesis.io - fresh Web Components info >> > +1 203-998-0403 >> > >> > * See me speak at the ng-conf April 5th-8th: http://bit.ly/2mw7HBj >> > * Listen to the Enterprise Java Newscast: http://enterprisejavanews.com >> > >> > >> > On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 4:29 AM, Bernd Bohmann < >> bernd.bohm...@googlemail.com> wrote: >> > Hello >> > >> > I think the changes will be not so complicated. The deltaspike pom >> looks nice :-) >> > If someone talks about git-flow process i'm out. >> > >> > Regards >> > >> > Bernd >> > >> > On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 12:28 AM, Leonardo Uribe <lu4...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> > +1 >> > >> > Change the release process is a pain, but I agree there are some >> benefits moving to git. >> > >> > But when I see here: >> > >> > https://github.com/apache/myfaces >> > >> > It says: >> > >> > mirrored from git://git.apache.org/myfaces.git >> > >> > But I have never checked where that file is or how to change it. >> > >> > Looking in deltaspike, the svn repo only has the site (for the CMS) and >> the source code lives on git. If that so, we still need the svn, so I agree >> it is a good idea to move only some subprojects to git. >> > >> > regards, >> > >> > Leonardo Uribe >> > >> > >> > Virus-free. www.avast.com >> > >> > 2017-04-17 11:40 GMT-05:00 Grant Smith <work.gr...@gmail.com>: >> > +1 >> > >> > Couldn't agree more. >> > >> > Grant Smith - V.P. Information Technology >> > Marathon Computer Systems, LLC. >> > >> > On Thu, Apr 13, 2017 at 2:39 AM, Bernd Bohmann < >> bernd.bohm...@atanion.com> wrote: >> > From my side a big >> > >> > +1 >> > >> > I'm still happy with subversion but for others the collaboration is >> easier and the project visibility a little bit better. >> > >> > Regards >> > >> > Bernd >> > >> > Am 13.04.2017 09:41 schrieb "Thomas Andraschko" < >> andraschko.tho...@gmail.com>: >> > +0 >> > I usually just work on MF core and there it doesn't make much >> difference. >> > >> > 2017-04-13 8:57 GMT+02:00 Dennis Kieselhorst <m...@dekies.de>: >> > Hi, >> > >> > have you ever thought of migrating to Git? I see more and more Apache >> > projects moving. In the past SVN or Git didn't make any difference to me >> > but now I'm thinking that as an Open Source project you need to be >> > present on GitHub to get Pull Requests from the community. It's much >> > more fun contributing there than attaching patches to JIRA issues. >> > >> > We could start with Trinidad and Tobago to avoid conflicts with the 2.3 >> > release. >> > >> > Cheers >> > Dennis >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> >> >
