On Mar 3, 2013, at 1:47 PM, Aristedes Maniatis <[email protected]> wrote:
> Since I sometimes lurk around infra, I'd be happy to help. Great, thanks! > However, I am not clear on what the goals are. Is this mainly about being > able to commit offline? Or is there a goal to attract new developers with a > better github experience? Git is just a different tool. It is not just about working offline (although this is certainly there). It is a different workflow for dealing with the patches, merging, etc. Even "git log -p" would warrant a migration :) While I am using git on the client over git-svn, the SVN backend is often a hindrance. The GitHub angle is about ease of collaboration - people who are tweaking and fixing Cayenne for their own purpose will have a much easier mechanism to contribute back and maintain their fixes until we review and commit. Though I guess this is entirely possible already with GitHub SVN mirrors (and I am not holding my breath that we'd suddenly get an surge in contributions because of that :)). So that's just streamlining things. > Since one of the limitations of git is that you cannot clone less than the > whole project, I think we should consider splitting > http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/cayenne/main/trunk/docs/ into a separate > repo, with tutorials under it. Then we'll face a problem of releasing code from multiple repos. I am actually all for better modularity, and docs is a good candidate to be taken out of the main project. Maybe we migrate things as is initially and then think how to split it better on the other end? BTW the docbook version of our docs is very compact, so it shouldn't create much overhead for anyone. Current "main" git clone from GitHub is about 98 MB in size. This includes our entire history, including probably some jar binaries from pre-maven days. Uncompressed docs are 4.2 MB. I guess we may decide to split pre-3.0 code to get a smaller repo, but probably not worth the trouble. > I don't agree about leaving 'archive' behind in svn, unless we are sure we > never want anyone to find or work on those resources ever again. Once the > main repo is moved, no-one is likely to work on an old archive repository. I am fine if we move everything over. Even though nobody is working on any of those. Andrus > Ari > > > On 3/03/13 8:48pm, Andrus Adamchik wrote: >> Just found this Jira about Wicket migration to Git: >> >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-4204 >> >> It has just enough info for us to kickstart the process I hope. So before I >> open a similar Jira, I guess we need to decide 2 things: >> >> 1. who'll be our infra/git volunteers. I am ready to be one. We'll likely >> need one more. >> >> 2. The breakdown of the target Git repo. We have a bunch of top level >> directories under here: >> >> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/cayenne/ >> >> "main", "site" and "artwork" are all active and up-to-date. So those will >> become individual repos. The rest are somewhat stale, but we don't want it >> to disappear of course. I guess once we get access to the Git repo and see >> if we can use subfolders for repos, we'll create a folder called "archive" >> and move the remaining stuff under it. Or just keep it in SVN (which we'll >> likely keep around, just like Tapestry and Wicket did). >> >> Thoughts? >> >> Andrus >> >> >> On Nov 2, 2012, at 4:14 AM, Robert Zeigler <[email protected]> >> wrote: >>> Tapestry did make the switch to git awhile back. Unfortunately, due to >>> finishing up my schooling, I have not been as actively involved the last >>> while as I would like. I might have the git-switch discussions saved >>> somewhere that I can dig through to see how to get the process rolling. >>> >>> Robert >>> >>> On Nov 1, 2012, at 11/13:52 PM , Michael Gentry wrote: >>> >>>> I'm not sure, but I kind of thought the Tapestry project had already >>>> done it, so perhaps someone there could comment if they have. I've >>>> only used Git through GitHub thus far and am still a novice, but it >>>> does have some nice features. >>>> >>>> mrg >>>> >>>> >>>> On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 4:44 PM, Andrus Adamchik <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>>> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-general/201211.mbox/%3C798BB60C-BEEF-4B38-ACF3-2738A07D6595%40oracle.com%3E >>>>> >>>>> I am not following infra-dev, but the question of Git came up on the >>>>> incubator list in an unrelated thread (see the link above). I'd love if >>>>> we could do away with svn and git-svn and go Git all the way. Anyone has >>>>> any insight on where Infra stands on that and how to sign up Cayenne for >>>>> Git switchover? >>>>> >>>>> Andrus >> > > -- > --------------------------> > Aristedes Maniatis > GPG fingerprint CBFB 84B4 738D 4E87 5E5C 5EFA EF6A 7D2E 3E49 102A >
