Let me repeat again that the value I see in the Flex report is that it identifies some issues that projects moving to git should consider and plan for. This will make other projects migrations smoother.
Sent from a mobile device, please excuse mistakes and brevity On 26 Apr 2013 18:35, "Luciano Resende" <luckbr1...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Fri, Apr 26, 2013 at 2:17 AM, Ross Gardler > <rgard...@opendirective.com>wrote: > >> I just wanted to thank you for the feedback you provided in your last >> board report with respect to your experiences with moving to Git. This >> kind of information is really useful to those in other projects. For >> the benefit of the archives (and ComDev PMC) I've copied the relevant >> section at the end of this mail. >> >> I'd really like to see this documented in the ComDev project. Perhaps >> in the section "For Commtters/PMCs". This could form the start of a >> page on best practices for version control which would link out to >> appropriate documentation on Git and SVN workflows, review processes >> etc. >> >> If anyone in the Flex community can write up your experiences as >> documentation on that site (it is editable by all committers) we'd >> really appreciate it.Note, the ComDev site is intended to "signpost" >> into more detailed documentation. The idea is not to be fully detailed >> but to provide a high level overview linking out to the details. To >> this end the content in the board report is at about the right level >> for the ComDev site, it just needs a little context padding for the >> ComDev site. If you have process documents on your own project pages >> please feel free to link to them as appropriate. >> >> If someone does find the time - thank you in advance. If not, then >> thank you for including it in the board report. Hopefully I or another >> ComDev memver will find the time to move it into the ComDev site. >> >> Ross >> >> Relevant section from board report: >> >> We moved our code base from SVN to Git in mid-March. It has been a much >> more difficult transition than expected. Three weeks later, folks are >> still >> confused about how to use Git as it has many options for performing tasks >> that can have significant implications. Git's database model is not >> suited >> for partial checkouts like SVN, making the management of our "whiteboard" >> (a >> playground for committers) much more difficult as you have to download the >> entire whiteboard (currently 245MB) first. There is discussion of >> managing >> the whiteboard on GitHub, but others feel that it doesn't conform to the >> Apache way. >> >> The move to Git has slowed contributions from some committers as folks >> aren't sure they have the time to learn to use Git and are afraid of using >> the wrong options. Hopefully, the net benefit promised by the Git >> supporters will eventually be realized. >> >> The move to Git has also broken our release and build scripts and we are >> in >> the process of fixing them. We also need to get the Git mirrors working >> again, as well as our CI implementation. >> >> >> >> Ross Gardler (@rgardler) >> Programme Leader (Open Development) >> OpenDirective http://opendirective.com >> > > > -1 for using Apache Flex's bad experience, as a concrete example, as this > might give the wrong perception about Git at Apache. > > +1 for documenting most used git and svn workflows used in Apache > Projects, this might avoid similar problems in the future. > > > -- > Luciano Resende > http://people.apache.org/~lresende > http://twitter.com/lresende1975 > http://lresende.blogspot.com/ >
