On Sun, Jul 31, 2011 at 11:52 AM, Robert Newson <[email protected]> wrote: > Sounds good to me. Should we do srcmv before or after this epoch? >
I am undecided. I think executing srcmv would be easier on Git, but in a worst case scenario reverting to SVN it would be easier if we had done it in SVN. I am open to either method. The srcmv script I wrote a long time ago to handle the SVN commands to make it happen would need a lot of cleaning up to handle it though. > +1 for prohibiting merge commits to stable branches. > > B. > > On 31 July 2011 17:29, Paul Davis <[email protected]> wrote: >> Dearest Devs, >> >> A few months ago I did some work in preparing a solution to using Git >> as a primary VCS at the ASF. Now that we have released 1.1.0 and 1.0.3 >> there's a bit of a lull in large events dealing with the code base. As >> such I thought now would be a good time to propose the idea of moving >> CouchDB to Git. >> >> A few things on what this would mean for the community: >> >> 1. The SVN repository would no longer be the primary source for >> CouchDB source code. It'll still exist for house keeping things like >> the website and other bits. >> >> 2. For the time being there is no fancy integration with anything like >> Gerrit. The initial phase of moving to Git will be to just test the >> infrastructure aspects of the system to make sure its all configured >> correctly and works reliably. This also applies to GitHub. There's no >> magical "Pull request turns into JIRA ticket" or similar. GitHub will >> remain as it is a currently, a read-only mirror in the GitHub >> ecosystem. >> >> 3. There are a couple minor restrictions on our Git usage as required >> by ASF policy. First, rewriting Git commits on master is prohibited. I >> also added a feature that allows us to make branches that can't be >> rewritten either in the interest of protecting release branches. >> Currently, this is just a regular expression that matches >> "(master)|(rel/*)" in the branch name. The second issue is that >> there's always a possibility we have to revert to SVN if things break. >> In this interest I've disabled inserting merge commits into those same >> branches. >> >> 4. Before making the complete switch I'll end up making a handful of >> Git clones to check that our history is preserved. I plan on writing a >> script to make Graphviz images of the branch history and so on, but >> having people volunteer to look back at the history to spot errors >> would be helpful as well. >> >> 5. There are probably other things, but this is mostly to just kick >> off serious discussion on making the switch. >> >> Thoughts? >> >> Paul >> >
