Folks, All of the git discussions have been happening on infrastructure-dev, rather than here, so it would perhaps be a better idea to continue this conversation where the bulk of the people interested in git are hanging out.
-- Martin Cooper On Tue, Dec 9, 2008 at 2:14 PM, Mark Struberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi Craig! > > Answers inside... > > > --- Craig L Russell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb am Di, 9.12.2008: > > > Von: Craig L Russell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Betreff: Re: [OT] git and Apache's svn? > > An: [email protected] > > CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Datum: Dienstag, 9. Dezember 2008, 19:15 > > There is a group inside Apache who are advocating for an > > official git repo managed by Apache infrastructure. The > > discussion is ongoing... > You may contact Jason van Zyl, with whom I had a similar discussion more > than 1 year or so ago. I can remember that he was quite happy with git. > > > I am not an expert on git, so take this as an observation > > more than fact: One big concern with git is the lack of > > "accountability" with code changes. Once code has > > been pushed to a git repo, the identity of the committer is > > lost, or at least not easily found. And unlike having the > > code attached to a JIRA, with an explicit "Apache > > licensed contribution" there is no automatic way to > > guarantee that a git-managed code change is actually > > intended as a contribution. > Actually it is exactly the opposite! If you use git the git way, then the > information about the author, his email, the date of the change and the > original commit msg is preserved, regardless of how many pulls and repos are > between the creation and the last merge. > The 2nd argument is therefore also not that a problem. You can bet that > Linus did take care a lot about this after the SCO trial ;) > > > > > The other big concern is transparency. Without a > > centrally-managed git repo (see above) there is no way for > > the community to easily see what is being developed where. > That's kind of true. In practice this is not such a big problem since the > changes will be reflected in the main svn. > > > I have no dog in this hunt. My aim is for the OpenJPA team > > to be as productive and engaged as possible, while staying > > true to the spirit and rules of the foundation. So for now, > > creating and using git-on-svn is fine for individuals, but > > to use git project-wide needs more explicit guidance from > > the foundation. > This would imho require official support from the Apache infrastructure > team. > > LieGrue, > strub > > > > > Craig > > > > On Dec 9, 2008, at 7:58 AM, Patrick Linskey wrote: > > > > > Yeah, git is amazing. Lets you do lots of interesting > > things, collaboration-wise. > > > > > > That said, I imagine that we want to stay with the > > Apache Way for our primary source repository story, which > > means svn for the foreseeable future I'd imagine. I > > expect that we'd see a lot of benefit by moving to svn > > 1.5 (which has proper merge support, and thus helps a lot > > with branching). > > > > > > -Patrick > > > > > > On Dec 9, 2008, at 6:18 AM, Kevin Sutter wrote: > > > > > >> This sounds interesting. It sounds like we could > > provide for multiple > > >> "build levels" and only promote changes > > when they are really ready. All of > > >> this without requiring the use of sandboxes. Or, > > am I reading more into > > >> this? > > >> > > >> Kevin > > >> > > >> On Tue, Dec 9, 2008 at 5:08 AM, Mark Struberg > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >> > > >>> Hi Patrick! > > >>> > > >>> In which way do you like to access the apache > > svn? > > >>> > > >>> Did you already work with git? > > >>> > > >>> Do you only like to manage local branches with > > git (git on top of a svn > > >>> checkout)? > > >>> > > >>> Do you like to use the git-svn bridge for > > doing all the local management > > >>> with git? > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> The way I use git for Apache projects is the > > 'git on top' approach (I'll be > > >>> more verbose since I do not know what you > > already know): > > >>> > > >>> 1.) do a svn co > > >>> 2.) create a .gitignore file which contains > > /target and .svn > > >>> 3.) modify my .svnignore to contain .git and > > .gitignore > > >>> 4.) $> git-init > > >>> 5.) $> git-add src > > >>> 6.) $> git-status to check if the index > > doesn't contain crap > > >>> 7.) $> git-commit -m"initial import > > from SVN" > > >>> > > >>> I subsequently do some svn update and commit > > them to my local git master > > >>> branche. > > >>> In parallel I do test branches with > > >>> $> git-checkout -b mytestbranch > > >>> see git-branch for more info > > >>> > > >>> If the changes work out, you can merge them > > into master and afterwards > > >>> perform a svn commit to the Apache repo. > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> Another way would be to use the git-svn > > bridge. pro: you'd have the whole > > >>> history in git (so you could do a git-blame > > for example) con: you cannot use > > >>> mvn scm (e.g. for releasing), since the > > maven-scm-providers-svn relies on > > >>> having a SVN structure locally and the > > maven-scm-providers-git relies on > > >>> having a remote git repo... > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> LieGrü, > > >>> strub > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> --- Patrick Linskey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > schrieb am Di, 9.12.2008: > > >>> > > >>>> Von: Patrick Linskey > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > >>>> Betreff: [OT] git and Apache's svn? > > >>>> An: [email protected] > > >>>> Datum: Dienstag, 9. Dezember 2008, 8:18 > > >>>> Hi, > > >>>> > > >>>> Has anyone had any experience with using > > git with > > >>>> Apache's svn repository? > > >>>> > > >>>> Thanks, > > >>>> > > >>>> -Patrick > > >>>> > > >>>> --Patrick Linskey > > >>>> 202 669 5907 > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > > > > > --Patrick Linskey > > > 202 669 5907 > > > > > > > Craig L Russell > > Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System > > http://db.apache.org/jdo > > 408 276-5638 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp! > > > >
