On Sun, Jan 5, 2014 at 12:07 PM, Mark Miller <markrmil...@gmail.com> wrote: > My point here is not really to discuss the merits of Git VS SVN on a feature > / interface basis. We might as well talk about MySQL vs Postgres. > > Personally, I prefer GIT. It feels good when I use it. SVN feels like crap. > That doesn't make me want to move. I've used SVN for years with Lucene/Solr, > and like everyone, it's pretty much second nature. > > The problem is the world is moving. It may not be clear to everyone yet, but > give it a bit more time and it will be. > > Git already owns the open source world. It rivals SVN by most guesses in the > proprietary world. This is a strong hard trend. The same trend that saw SVN > eat CVS. I think clearly, a distributed version control system will > dominate. And clearly Git has won. > > I'm not ready to call a vote, because I don't think it's critical we switch > yet. But I wanted to continue the discussion, as obviously, plenty of it > will be needed over time before we made such a switch. > > It's not about one thing being better than the other. It's about using what > everyone else uses so you don't provide a barrier to contribution. It's > about the post I linked to when I started this thread. > > I personally don't care about pull requests and Github. I don't think any of > it's features are that great, other than it acts as a central repo. Git is > not good because of Github IMO. But Git and Github are eating the world. > > Most of the patches I have processed now are made against Git. Jumping from > SVN to Git and back is very annoying IMO though. There are plenty of tools > and workflows for it and they all suck. > > Anyway, as the trend continues, it will become even more obvious that > Lucene/Solr will start looking stale on SVN. We have enough image problems > in terms of being modern at Apache. We will need to manage the ones we can. > > We should not choose the tools that simply make us fuzzy and comfortable. > We should choose the tools that are best for the project and future > contributions in the long term. > > - Mark > >
The idea that this has anything to do with contributors is misleading. Today contributors can use either SVN or GIT. They have their choice. How can it be any better than that for contributors? As demonstrated over the weekend, its also possible today for contributors to use svn+jira or git+pull request workflow. As i said earlier, why not spend our time trying to make it easier on contributors and support git/github workflows (e.g. just hashing shit out, fixing contribution docs, making it clear we accept pull requests, and so on). Because after all, this whole discussion is only about what the committers use... we should focus on the contributor first. This is significantly less controversial (e.g. doesn't require me nor Uwe to use overcomplicated tools with a steaming-pile-of-shit API) and we can make real progress on it today. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
