It seems like using git could provide some really compelling advantages. At least one of which would be to enable the security team to put together a patch set outside of SVN. That would make it easier for us to compile, test, and save partial fixes to security problems without having the subversion commit logs reveal the issues prematurely.
Jay Kevan Miller wrote: > > On Dec 26, 2008, at 3:48 PM, Jacek Laskowski wrote: > >> On Thu, Dec 18, 2008 at 7:55 AM, Jason Dillon <ja...@planet57.com >> <mailto:ja...@planet57.com>> wrote: >>> I've been doing some experimenting using svn.eu.apache.org with git, >>> so far >>> it has gone well. >> >> What does git have that svn doesn't which makes you so interested in >> the subject? > > IIUC, the major advantages of GIT are: > > * offline commits - you can commit changes, even if online. > * cheap branching - this would make it much simpler for individuals to > create private local branches and work on implementing a particular > feature, without interfering with other development they might be > working on in the same code branch. > * fast merging - given the cheap branching, you need to do a lot of > merging, which GIT is supposed to do very well > > GIT would not be a replacement of SVN. The GIT repositories are actually > mirroring svn. GIT would just be a new tool for accessing our code. > > There are some usages of GIT that would not fit well into an Apache > project. For instance, I would not want to see project members using GIT > as a private means of sharing code updates. Ultimately, code needs to > get into our svn repo -- that's where we should be sharing code. > > I'm going to look for some guides on using GIT on apache projects. > > Barring any objections, I'm going to request that Geronimo be added to > the GIT mirrors later this week. > > --kevan
