answers inside
--- Daniel Kulp <dk...@apache.org> schrieb am Fr, 24.4.2009:
> Von: Daniel Kulp <dk...@apache.org>
> Betreff: Re: Using GIT as the canonical repository for Maven 3.x
> An: dev@maven.apache.org
> CC: "Mark Struberg" <strub...@yahoo.de>
> Datum: Freitag, 24. April 2009, 2:51
> On Thu April 23 2009 5:46:50 pm Mark
> Struberg wrote:
> > technically there is no git repo which is 'better'
> than the other.
> > This hierarchy is an orga one.
> >
> > If you can pull from my repo and from Jasons, from
> whom will you pull your
> > master mainly? Bet you will pull from Jasons. And I
> also bet all
> > contributors will try to get their changes being
> pulled by Jason and
> > published in his repo at the end of the day.
>
> Two comments:
> 1) Jasons?!?! Why Jason? When was
> the last time he released anything?
> Maybe Johns or Brians or Bretts repos if you actually want
> your changes to go
> out in a release. :-)
Apologise, it seems my comment has been highly misleading (I'm not a native
english speaker as you might have noticed).
What I liked to express when I said 'Jasons repo' is the one main repo where he
(and of course the other maven committers) can push to. I should have been
using the term 'maven main repo' instead. It was ment as an opposite example to
a personal repo with 'experimental stuff'. And as an XP lover, I consider _all_
things which are not being reviewed by a 2nd person experimental ;)
Fact is: git offers a lot of different ways to work with, and we should have a
common understanding of how we like it to be used.
> 2) On a more serious note: this is EXACTLY the
> issue. Jason is no more
> special than I am or anyone else on the Maven
> PMC. That is why there is a
> centralized storage for the repo. Anyone
> on the PMC (actually, any
> committer) MUST have access to entire repo for the project
> and be able to do
> the releases or whatever. One persons copy
> cannot be any more "special" than
> anyone elses. We don't allow the
> "benevolent dictator" role around here.
>
> Dan
>
>
>
>
> >
> > LieGrue,
> > strub
> >
> > --- Robert Burrell Donkin <robertburrelldon...@gmail.com>
> schrieb am Do,
> 23.4.2009:
> > > Von: Robert Burrell Donkin <robertburrelldon...@gmail.com>
> > > Betreff: Re: Using GIT as the canonical
> repository for Maven 3.x
> > > An: "Maven Developers List" <dev@maven.apache.org>
> > > Datum: Donnerstag, 23. April 2009, 23:27
> > > On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 6:33 PM, Mark
> > > Struberg <strub...@yahoo.de>
> > >
> > > wrote:
> > > > +1 for moving to git.
> > > >
> > > > Jukka already mirrors a lot of projets on
> GitHub and
> > >
> > > there is already a git.apache.org domain too (not
> sure where
> > > this leads too).
> > >
> > > > Jason is already convinced, but for all
> other
> > >
> > > sceptics:
> > > > Basically the location of the repo is just
> wurscht! It
> > >
> > > doesn't make any difference, since any repo is
> simply a
> > > clone of each other.
> > >
> > > how is the code provenance control going to work
> using
> > > GIT?
> > >
>
LieGrue,
strub
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
