> Apache projects can¹t have writeable Github repos Ah. I didn't know that. Then, the comment regarding merging directly from GitHub isn't an option....
Tyler On Thu, Nov 20, 2014 at 10:45 AM, Mattmann, Chris A (3980) < [email protected]> wrote: > Hey Tyler, > > We can move to writeable Git repositories for Tika, but I¹m also of > the feeling that I¹m not sure what advantage in particular it would > allow over SVN and the current workflow since both interoperate with > Github and since Apache projects can¹t have writeable Github repos > (repo and its canonical bits must live at the ASF). > > Cheers, > Chris > > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > Chris Mattmann, Ph.D. > Chief Architect > Instrument Software and Science Data Systems Section (398) > NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory Pasadena, CA 91109 USA > Office: 168-519, Mailstop: 168-527 > Email: [email protected] > WWW: http://sunset.usc.edu/~mattmann/ > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > Adjunct Associate Professor, Computer Science Department > University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089 USA > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Ken Krugler <[email protected]> > Reply-To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> > Date: Thursday, November 20, 2014 at 5:25 AM > To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> > Subject: RE: Move definitively from SVN to Git ? > > > > >> From: Tyler Palsulich > >> Sent: November 19, 2014 5:43:12pm PST > >> To: [email protected] > >> Subject: Re: Move definitively from SVN to Git ? > >> > >> On Mon, Nov 17, 2014 at 6:23 AM, Nick Burch <[email protected]> > >>wrote: > >>> > >>> Given that non-committers can already work with Git, could you explain > >>> what committers would gain from the move to Git which would outweigh > >>>the > >>> effort that SVN-using committers would have to expend with the move? > >>> > >> > >> Applying patches from GitHub pull requests is kind of clunky... A > >> contributor sends PR, we review, make changes, accept, download a diff, > >> apply it, and svn commit, which is then mirrored back to GitHub. > >> > >> What is our preferred way of getting new contributions? In my opinion, > >>pull > >> request and merge is better than an upload/download/apply of a patch > >>file. > >> On the other hand, it might be awkward to have all patches come in as > >>pull > >> requests if we're referring to them from > >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/tika. > >> > >> Being able to work on separate branches for large changes (e.g. > >>TIKA-1445 > >> and TIKA-1302) is very convenient. > >> > >> What is the effort SVN-using committers would have to expend? > >> > >> I don't mean to incite a VCS war. ;) > > > >git v. svn is more like a brushfire that flares up every few months, at > >least on the @members list :) > > > >-- Ken > > > >-------------------------- > >Ken Krugler > >+1 530-210-6378 > >http://www.scaleunlimited.com > >custom big data solutions & training > >Hadoop, Cascading, Cassandra & Solr > > > > > > > > > > > >
