I don’t understand the response.  I said GitHub Mirror, which anyone can make a 
push request to from another GitHub repo (a GitHub fork) and from a clone of 
the Mirror not on GitHub.  If I push a change to the OpenOffice Mirror on 
GitHub, won’t the pull of those changes show up in the AOO SVN and the AOO Git 
wherever it is (since I am a recognized ASF committer)?
Is this not the easy case for newcomers?  Is this not supported with the AOO 
Mirror on GitHub already?
I also notice that the GitHub app will work with a local repo clone that is not 
from a GitHub repo as well (at least on Windows).  That is how I push and pull 
with the incubator-corinthia repository on ASF infrastructure. 
If there are now more Git commits than SVN commits, don’t the pulls of those 
also end up in the SVN?  I thought there was bidirectional synchronization.
Can you please explain what doesn’t work already?  Although I use the AOO SVN, 
I don’t think I miss any commits made via Git.  How am I mistaken?
Is this rather a concern for infrastructure server demand and performance?
-   Dennis
From: jan i [mailto:j...@apache.org] 
Sent: Friday, February 13, 2015 04:41
To: dev; Dennis Hamilton
Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] move repo to Git.
On 13 February 2015 at 13:13, Dennis E. Hamilton <dennis.hamil...@acm.org 
<mailto:dennis.hamil...@acm.org> > wrote:
Isn't having the mirror on GitHub an effective way to push changes to the SVN, 
especially for Apache committers who have project rights to the GitHub repo?  
Non-committer pull requests are as complicated either way, it seems to me, and 
the GitHub mirror might be superior for that.
no it is not. You cannot push from github to either git or svn at apache.
Please be aware that I wrote git, not github. ASF has its own git server, which 
is mandatory to use.

I assume the proposal is do-able, but I wonder what kind of disruption cost 
there is for current work.
Well it is not only do-able, at the moment about half of all ASF projects work 
that way. The disruption cost is an infra ticket, and about 3-4 hours downtime.
We have today more git commits than svn commits.
jan i.

 - Dennis

Below, I have no opinion, just wonder if these are also relevant considerations?

PS: Our current SVN repo is also used for source control of openoffice.org 
<http://openoffice.org> , So I assume it is not a total give-up.  Also, we have 
SVN tags and branches that might be problematic, I think.

PPS: The AOO repo is also a bit larger than what Linus apparently thinks is 
cool.  This gets back to how could the AOO repo be refactored in order to 
modularize the software and simplify (re-)building and staged evolution of 

-----Original Message-----
From: jan i [mailto:j...@apache.org <mailto:j...@apache.org> ]
Sent: Friday, February 13, 2015 03:44
To: dev
Subject: [PROPOSAL] move repo to Git.


We have now for a while had a readonly Git copy of our svn repo.

Should we move to a full git repo, making it easier for new developers to
participate (although it is in no way a guarantee, that it will attract new
people) by lowering the barrier.

For more documentation on Git at Apache see https://git-wip-us.apache.org/

Moving to a full git repo (see http://git.apache.org/), would mean giving
up our current SVN repo, but history etc. will be available in Git instead.

The choice is there, and it is just a matter of how people want to work.

thoughts ?

jan I.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org 
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org 

Reply via email to