On Wed, Apr 29, 2009 at 10:34 PM, Nigel Magnay nigel.mag...@gmail.comwrote:
My vote does not really count here, but Sun Oracle aggressively
supports
Mercurial in NetBeans. Based on reviews, Mercurial seemed to initially
have
a technical edge whereas GIT had a loyal following. They do
Milos, with all respect: Unless Nigel is an employee of or paid by
Microsoft, IBM, or whoever might have a professional interest in the
decline of NetBeans, I do think that's a valid expression of an
opinion.
On Mon, May 11, 2009 at 8:12 AM, Milos Kleint mkle...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Apr 29,
this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/Using-GIT-as-the-canonical-repository-for-Maven-3.x-tp23201420p23301063.html
Sent from the Maven Developers mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr
My vote does not really count here, but Sun Oracle aggressively supports
Mercurial in NetBeans. Based on reviews, Mercurial seemed to initially have
a technical edge whereas GIT had a loyal following. They do compete
aggressively and GIT has fixed many of its issues.
NetBeans works better
Do you see that Google choose Mercurial rather than Git ?
Mercurial support for Project Hosting on Google Code
http://google-code-updates.blogspot.com/2009/04/mercurial-support-for-project-hosting.html
Analysis of Git and Mercurial
http://code.google.com/p/support/wiki/DVCSAnalysis
Rémy
2009/4/27 Rémy Sanlaville remy.sanlavi...@gmail.com
Do you see that Google choose Mercurial rather than Git ?
well, they didn't exactly choose one over the other - they decided to
implement Mercurial support first because it fitted better (at the time)
with GoogleCode hosting - I wouldn't be
Do you see that Google choose Mercurial rather than Git ?
Mercurial support for Project Hosting on Google Code
http://google-code-updates.blogspot.com/2009/04/mercurial-support-for-project-hosting.html
Analysis of Git and Mercurial
http://code.google.com/p/support/wiki/DVCSAnalysis
Rémy
Stubbs antony.stu...@gmail.com
Reply-to: Maven Developers List dev@maven.apache.org
To: dev@maven.apache.org
Subject: Re: Using GIT as the canonical repository for Maven 3.x
Date: Fri, 24 Apr 2009 17:57:51 -0700 (PDT)
multiple branches in 1 repo (in hg
last time i looked you have to create a new copy
all rubbish from
.gitignore left in your working directory. And this may affect the build ...
LieGrue,
strub
--- Antony Stubbs antony.stu...@gmail.com schrieb am Sa, 25.4.2009:
Von: Antony Stubbs antony.stu...@gmail.com
Betreff: Re: Using GIT as the canonical repository for Maven 3.x
An: dev
://stubbisms.wordpress.com http://stubbisms.wordpress.com
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/Using-GIT-as-the-canonical-repository-for-Maven-3.x-tp23201420p23227239.html
Sent from the Maven Developers mailing list archive at Nabble.com
into a separate directory.
-
___
http://stubbisms.wordpress.com http://stubbisms.wordpress.com
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/Using-GIT-as-the-canonical-repository-for-Maven-3.x-tp23201420p23227239.html
Sent from the Maven Developers mailing list
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/Using-GIT-as-the-canonical-repository-for-Maven-3.x-tp23201420p23227239.html
Sent from the Maven Developers mailing list
archive at Nabble.com.
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail
If you like me to help then simply ping me, I'd be honoured to help.
I didn't dive into the testing structure in place there, but if it
doesn't exist already, some external ITs would be awesome. Something we
could run against the multiple implementations to guarantee compatibility.
as the canonical repository for Maven 3.x
An: Maven Developers List dev@maven.apache.org
Datum: Samstag, 25. April 2009, 22:58
If you like me to help then simply ping me, I'd be
honoured to help.
I didn't dive into the testing structure in place there,
but if it doesn't exist already, some
answers inside
--- Daniel Kulp dk...@apache.org schrieb am Fr, 24.4.2009:
Von: Daniel Kulp dk...@apache.org
Betreff: Re: Using GIT as the canonical repository for Maven 3.x
An: dev@maven.apache.org
CC: Mark Struberg strub...@yahoo.de
Datum: Freitag, 24. April 2009, 2:51
On Thu April 23
--- Daniel Kulp dk...@apache.org schrieb am Fr, 24.4.2009:
Von: Daniel Kulp dk...@apache.org
Betreff: Re: Using GIT as the canonical repository for Maven 3.x
An: dev@maven.apache.org
CC: Mark Struberg strub...@yahoo.de
Datum: Freitag, 24. April 2009, 2:51
On Thu April 23 2009 5:46:50 pm
Fr, 24.4.2009:
Von: Daniel Kulp dk...@apache.org
Betreff: Re: Using GIT as the canonical repository for Maven 3.x
An: dev@maven.apache.org
CC: Mark Struberg strub...@yahoo.de
Datum: Freitag, 24. April 2009, 2:51
On Thu April 23 2009 5:46:50 pm Mark
Struberg wrote
Here is a more complete summary of why I think GIT, and more
specifically JGIT is the best thing going for the SCM:
http://www.sonatype.com/people/2009/04/git-the-sweetest-scm-around/
On 23-Apr-09, at 10:00 AM, Jason van Zyl wrote:
Hi,
Maven was the first project at Apache to use JIRA and
Hi folks,
Thinking of distributed SCM, why choosing GIT over Mercurial or over Bazaar
?
They use GIT: http://git-scm.com/ (linux kernel)
They use Mercurial:
http://www.selenic.com/mercurial/wiki/index.cgi/ProjectsUsingMercurial(openJDK)
They use Bazaar: http://bazaar-vcs.org/WhoUsesBzr (MySQL)
We have already a long thread with lot of things so I won't repeat some
questions.
I'm +0 to move to GIT but -1 to go outside of the Apache infrastucture.
Emmanuel
On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 7:00 PM, Jason van Zyl jvan...@sonatype.com wrote:
Hi,
Maven was the first project at Apache to use JIRA
--- Brian Fox bri...@infinity.nu schrieb am Fr, 24.4.2009:
Von: Brian Fox bri...@infinity.nu
Betreff: Re: Using GIT as the canonical repository for Maven 3.x
An: dev@maven.apache.org
Datum: Freitag, 24. April 2009, 1:21
Mark Struberg wrote:
technically there is no git repo which is 'better
On 24-Apr-09, at 4:24 AM, Raphaël Piéroni wrote:
Hi folks,
Thinking of distributed SCM, why choosing GIT over Mercurial or over
Bazaar
?
For one of the biggest reasons is that there is an extremely good
implementation in Java. The other proof point is that this is
successfully being
Mark Struberg wrote:
Hi!
I thought in a similar direction. I think we can even let the maven-scm as it is.
The problematic usecase is if we have a multi-module build and like to release
only one of the sub modules.
John Casey prepared an example for this use case:
$ git-clone
Betreff: Re: Using GIT as the canonical repository for Maven 3.x
An: Maven Developers List dev@maven.apache.org
Datum: Freitag, 24. April 2009, 16:20
Mark Struberg wrote:
Hi!
I thought in a similar direction. I think we can even
let the maven-scm as it is.
The problematic usecase
On 24-Apr-09, at 10:20 , Paul Gier wrote:
Mark Struberg wrote:
Is sounds like the process used by our release plugin doesn't really
match the way git works, so maybe we can change the way the release
plugin works instead of trying to fit git into our model. Do we
really need to do a
On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 3:20 PM, Paul Gier pg...@redhat.com wrote:
Mark Struberg wrote:
Hi!
I thought in a similar direction. I think we can even let the maven-scm as
it is.
The problematic usecase is if we have a multi-module build and like to
release only one of the sub modules.
John
On 24-Apr-09, at 7:36 AM, Robert Burrell Donkin wrote:
Is sounds like the process used by our release plugin doesn't
really match
the way git works, so maybe we can change the way the release
plugin works
instead of trying to fit git into our model. Do we really need to
do a
clean
I have been starting to play with git for the jetty @ eclipse source
base, still backed by svn but just to get a feel for how it
works...and its pretty neat.
that said, I would say that maven3 is the prime mvn target to iron out
the mvn issues with release plugins and all the other core toolchain
On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 3:46 PM, Jason van Zyl jvan...@sonatype.com wrote:
On 24-Apr-09, at 7:36 AM, Robert Burrell Donkin wrote:
Is sounds like the process used by our release plugin doesn't really
match
the way git works, so maybe we can change the way the release plugin
works
instead of
On 24-Apr-09, at 7:55 AM, Robert Burrell Donkin wrote:
On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 3:46 PM, Jason van Zyl
jvan...@sonatype.com wrote:
On 24-Apr-09, at 7:36 AM, Robert Burrell Donkin wrote:
Is sounds like the process used by our release plugin doesn't
really
match
the way git works, so
On 4/24/09, Jason van Zyl jvan...@sonatype.com wrote:
On 24-Apr-09, at 7:55 AM, Robert Burrell Donkin wrote:
On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 3:46 PM, Jason van Zyl
jvan...@sonatype.com wrote:
On 24-Apr-09, at 7:36 AM, Robert Burrell Donkin wrote:
Is sounds like the process used by our release
as the canonical repository for Maven 3.x
An: Maven Developers List dev@maven.apache.org
Datum: Freitag, 24. April 2009, 20:17
On 4/24/09, Jason van Zyl jvan...@sonatype.com
wrote:
On 24-Apr-09, at 7:55 AM, Robert Burrell Donkin
wrote:
On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 3:46 PM, Jason van Zyl
jvan
as the canonical repository for Maven 3.x
An: dev@maven.apache.org
Datum: Freitag, 24. April 2009, 1:21
Mark Struberg wrote:
technically there is no git repo which is 'better'
than the other. This hierarchy is an orga one.
If you can pull from my repo and from Jasons, from
whom will you pull your master
There is one very important issue with dscm:
To be in line with our goals for Maven in general - especially
reproducibility - the tag created from a release MUST be available for
others to grab and rebuild from. This means that a git push is
absolutely necessary to finish off the release
Yes I agree. Only the canonical code can be used to produce official
maven builds and those tags are pushed back to the master. No different
really than what happens today.
On 4/24/2009 4:53 PM, John Casey wrote:
There is one very important issue with dscm:
To be in line with our goals for
If developers here were truly interested they would ask and I'm
always happy to answer specific questions.
I'd just like to point out one thing: it's not necessarily lack of
interest that can keep developers out of the picture, but also an
inability to keep up. Too much project velocity
On 24-Apr-09, at 11:17 AM, Robert Burrell Donkin wrote:
Correct. The model that Android uses I would say is optimal for an
open source project. People can take real copies and derive all the
benefit from that, but they push to a gatekeeper where submissions
are
vetted. Gerrit represents
-as-the-canonical-repository-for-Maven-3.x-tp23201420p23227175.html
Sent from the Maven Developers mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h
commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
-
___
http://stubbisms.wordpress.com http://stubbisms.wordpress.com
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/Using-GIT-as-the-canonical-repository-for-Maven-3.x-tp23201420p23227208.html
Sent from
-as-the-canonical-repository-for-Maven-3.x-tp23201420p23227239.html
Sent from the Maven Developers mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h
Hi,
Maven was the first project at Apache to use JIRA and though there was
a great deal of concern/noise about using JIRA it ultimately proved to
be a decent system and now lots of projects are using JIRA.
I'm not particularly interested in mandating everything in Maven to
use GIT but I
Excellent. I do not have a long history with Git but from the projects I
used I'm always annoyed when I have to the projects I develop using SVN. So,
if my vote counts anyway I'm +1. We started using it for OI4J and everyone
getting accustom is loving it. Soon, I hope, all OPS4J projects will be
I'm fine with moving to Git. When you say it will start with Maven 3.x, what
does that include? Will all the trunks switch over or just components/trunk to
start with?
Jason van Zyl wrote:
Hi,
Maven was the first project at Apache to use JIRA and though there was a
great deal of
Zyl jvan...@sonatype.com
Betreff: Using GIT as the canonical repository for Maven 3.x
An: Maven Developers List dev@maven.apache.org
Datum: Donnerstag, 23. April 2009, 19:00
Hi,
Maven was the first project at Apache to use JIRA and
though there was a great deal of concern/noise about using
I would like to start it with Maven 3.x only because I would be
willing to put in the effort to maintain it, find resources to
maintain it and support users.
I can't speak for everyone, but if we wanted to move everything to GIT
I would be in favor of that.
I think we basically decide
Sounds like an interesting idea, though it does bring up the question of
what lives at the ASF if not the project source code. Having said that,
I understand the reasons for using an external hosting service.
In any case, I've used Git a little bit for utility projects and to
check out other
On 23-Apr-09, at 11:13 AM, John Casey wrote:
Sounds like an interesting idea, though it does bring up the
question of what lives at the ASF if not the project source code.
Having said that, I understand the reasons for using an external
hosting service.
In any case, I've used Git a
On the release plugin I believe John Smart has that working. And
having our release toolchain tested before switching is a completely
reasonable criterion.
That's my primary concern, that the tools support it, or we experiment
first to find out _how_ they work. It seems like from the
+0I never used GIT but I'm hearing a lot of good things about it and it is
already used by many opensources projects.
I would prefer to not have another drama with infra team if possible.
Perhaps we could help them to set it up if necessary ?
If you have tools for GIT on MacOS, do not hesitate to
On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 6:33 PM, Mark Struberg strub...@yahoo.de wrote:
+1 for moving to git.
Jukka already mirrors a lot of projets on GitHub and there is already a
git.apache.org domain too (not sure where this leads too).
Jason is already convinced, but for all other sceptics:
pulled by Jason and published in his repo
at the end of the day.
LieGrue,
strub
--- Robert Burrell Donkin robertburrelldon...@gmail.com schrieb am Do,
23.4.2009:
Von: Robert Burrell Donkin robertburrelldon...@gmail.com
Betreff: Re: Using GIT as the canonical repository for Maven 3.x
An: Maven
Hi,
GIT is already proposed by infrastructure in read only mode
http://git.apache.org/
Using GIT in write mode sounds like a normal step.
Does Maven SCM support *fully* GIT? I think specially for some plugins
like the release plugin
Cheers,
Vincent
2009/4/23 Jason van Zyl
: Vincent Siveton vincent.sive...@gmail.com
Betreff: Re: Using GIT as the canonical repository for Maven 3.x
An: Maven Developers List dev@maven.apache.org
Datum: Donnerstag, 23. April 2009, 23:48
Hi,
GIT is already proposed by infrastructure in read only
mode
http://git.apache.org/
Using
Mark Struberg wrote:
technically there is no git repo which is 'better' than the other.
This hierarchy is an orga one.
If you can pull from my repo and from Jasons, from whom will you pull your
master mainly? Bet you will pull from Jasons. And I also bet all contributors
will try to get
I think DVCS would benefit Maven doc. Someone (not a commiter) could clone
the site, fix it, contribute it back without having to jump through the JIRA
+ patch + convince a committer to pay attention hoop. The main
difference here is that Git makes it really easy to merge in changes and
Agreed 100%, it applies across the board. We have two hurdles, one easy,
one not so easy:
1. fix the release plugin / scm provider.
2. convince infra to host a rw git repo.
Tim O'Brien wrote:
I think DVCS would benefit Maven doc. Someone (not a commiter) could clone
the site, fix it,
Personally, I'm +0 on the idea moving to git.I really don't care one way
or the other if its svn or git.
However, I'm -1 to anything that involves pulling the code outside of the ASF
unless it would get the blessing from infrastructure and/or the board. If
you want to invest some
robertburrelldon...@gmail.com
Betreff: Re: Using GIT as the canonical repository for Maven 3.x
An: Maven Developers List dev@maven.apache.org
Datum: Donnerstag, 23. April 2009, 23:27
On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 6:33 PM, Mark
Struberg strub...@yahoo.de
wrote:
+1 for moving to git
2) On a more serious note: this is EXACTLY the issue. Jason is no more
special than I am or anyone else on the Maven PMC. That is why there is a
centralized storage for the repo. Anyone on the PMC (actually, any
committer) MUST have access to entire repo for the project and be able to do
There are points on either side of this for me. In summary, I'm in
favour of greater exploration of using GIT, but not a wholesale switch
today.
On 24/04/2009, at 3:00 AM, Jason van Zyl wrote:
I'd be happy if everyone here wanted to use GIT but I do believe
that I have a better chance
On 23-Apr-09, at 5:33 PM, Daniel Kulp wrote:
Personally, I'm +0 on the idea moving to git.I really don't care
one way
or the other if its svn or git.
However, I'm -1 to anything that involves pulling the code outside
of the ASF
unless it would get the blessing from infrastructure
On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 10:00 AM, Jason van Zyl jvan...@sonatype.com wrote:
Maven was the first project at Apache to use JIRA and though there was a
great deal of concern/noise about using JIRA it ultimately proved to be a
decent system and now lots of projects are using JIRA.
I'm not
On 23-Apr-09, at 6:17 PM, Brett Porter wrote:
There are points on either side of this for me. In summary, I'm in
favour of greater exploration of using GIT, but not a wholesale
switch today.
On 24/04/2009, at 3:00 AM, Jason van Zyl wrote:
I'd be happy if everyone here wanted to use GIT
On 23-Apr-09, at 7:50 PM, Wendy Smoak wrote:
On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 10:00 AM, Jason van Zyl
jvan...@sonatype.com wrote:
Maven was the first project at Apache to use JIRA and though there
was a
great deal of concern/noise about using JIRA it ultimately proved
to be a
decent system and
2009/4/24 Brian Fox bri...@infinity.nu
Mark Struberg wrote:
technically there is no git repo which is 'better' than the other. This
hierarchy is an orga one.
If you can pull from my repo and from Jasons, from whom will you pull your
master mainly? Bet you will pull from Jasons. And I also
65 matches
Mail list logo
