I think the big question Paul was trying to get an answer to was "srcmv before or after?". I'm not sure I have strong feelings, but I feel like we need to answer that or all these +1s aren't going to move us forward.
On Mon, Aug 1, 2011 at 12:11, Robert Dionne <[email protected]>wrote: > +1 > > > > > On Jul 31, 2011, at 12:29 PM, Paul Davis 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 > >
