I think the correct way would be, that each branch is made par on each project wherever experience in addition to the branches of tickets or integration necessary. Thus whiteboard space is confined in each repository. -- Jose Barragan Chief Software Architect Codeoscopic Madrid C/. Infanta Mercedes, 92. Planta 5. 505. 28020 Madrid. Tel.: +34 912 94 80 80
On Mar 18, 2013, at 2:06 AM, Om <bigosma...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Mar 17, 2013 5:56 PM, "Frédéric THOMAS" <webdoubl...@hotmail.com> wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> I agree with you Justin, each persons branch is a bad pratice, the repo > can really get quickly messy, I wouldn't take this risk. > > Describe 'messy', please. I am not sure what the concern is. > >> Maybe one repo by person is not feasible, how do we know without asking ? > > Why is this a better option? > >> If it's not feasible, I would stay in SVN too and if I really want to > work with GIT, I would use git-svn clone, it takes a bit of time to setup > but once done, it works like a charm. >> > > I could live with leaving the whiteboard in SVN. > > This is probably why no other project has whiteboards in git. > > Thanks, > Om > >> >> -Fred >> >> -----Message d'origine----- From: Justin Mclean >> Sent: Monday, March 18, 2013 1:12 AM >> >> To: dev@flex.apache.org >> Subject: Re: Committers - preparing for Git >> >> Hi, >> >>> I vote for creating a branch for each committer under whiteboard. Anyone >>> else want to chime in? >> >> By branch I assume you mean repo not sure if everyone having their own > branch make sense as each persons branch would contain different files etc > etc. >> >> But currently using git for the white board area is basically unusable > (unless you have high speed access) , so we either keep it in SVN or create > repo for each committer however I'm not sure Infra would go for that second > option. >> >> Justin
