On Thu, Mar 8, 2012 at 2:10 PM, Maciej Stachowiak <m...@apple.com> wrote: > > It seems like there are a couple of different issues here that affect how we > do version control. Currently we have an SVN primary repository, some > contributors use SVN, and others use git via git-svn. > > It seems like there are two possible changes we can make, and it is not > really clear to me which is being advocated: > > 1) Offer only a git repository; everyone uses git. > 2) Use a git central repository; but some form of svn access is provided (is > this even possible?)
There appear to be scripts on the interweb that would allow access to a git repo over svn. I would be against doing this here (if we're going to allow svn access at all, we might as well stay with what we have). I believe that a git repo would allow slightly easier cloning and branching, and would make the overall system more reliable (because we wouldn't have to worry about the git/svn bridge breaking or getting corrupted). I don't think either of these reasons is particularly compelling, although I have no real insight into the uptime / ops costs of keeping the two repos in sync vs. only a git repo. I think the major benefit in moving git-only would be to simplify the tooling and the documentation for the project (we wouldn't have to document how to access everything two or three different ways). I am uncertain but skeptical that the tooling benefit outweighs the cost of the conversion. -- Dirk _______________________________________________ webkit-dev mailing list webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev