Le 23/04/15 09:26, Radovan Semancik a écrit : > On 04/22/2015 12:28 PM, Steve Moyer wrote: >> I think we've spent enough time rehashing the past ... let me just say >> that I think things would have gone a lot differently if there'd been an >> easy way to provide a repository branch for us to check code into. On >> the other hand, I can certainly understand why you don't want to change >> your infrastructure every time someone pops into the IRC channel - SVN >> doesn't make it so easy to limit permissions and you probably see a >> hundred people a month come by then disappear (like I seemed to do). > > This was exactly my problem when I wanted to contribute to the API. > The entry barrier is quite high. I'm not talking about the complexity > of the code or the required programming skill. Just think what someone > that wants to contribute needs to do: > 1) Check out the code. > 2) Work ... and suffer > ... No place to commit changes, no way how to roll back, no way how to > plug the changes into CI, ... > 3) Create a patch > 4) Submit patch > 5) Wait > 6) Checkout the source code with the patch, resolve conflicts or check > everything out again and set it up again > 7) repeat ... or quit because this is just too much overhead > > I have used Subversion for almost a decade. But the day that we've > switched the projects to git was one of the happiest days in my > professional life. I still feel quite reluctant to get back to > subversion to be able to contribute ... > > Haven't you thought about switching the projects to git? This will > make contributions much easier. > Indeed, we did. All the new prohects (Kerby, fortress) are now using git.
We already discussed about switching to git for the other projects, a few months ago. Beside the clear benefuts you have mentioned, there is also the fact that I'm fedup of switching from svn to git, and back. So, yes, we *will* switch to git, most certainly after we have reached a RC.
