Regarding question b), I vote yes, whatever the organization of the development
Regarding a), for my part I rather see something between A and B. I think of the following questions that should be answered first : - will there be 1 repo per major version like the current SVN setup ? or only branches in a unique repo ? - how to backport modifications from one major version to another ? is cherry-picking ok ? - where will the main repo be (the one committers will push to)? ASF or github ? where should we open and treat pull requests, ASF or github ? (currently having the SVN repo at ASF and pull requests at github is not convenient) Sylvain On 2 sept. 2014, at 18:41, Mark Thomas <ma...@apache.org> wrote: > I've been looking at this again (anything to get a break from writing > parsers for cookies) and chatting with some of the infra folks that look > after the ASF's git repos. > > There are a couple of things we need to do: > a) decide how we want to organise development in git > b) decide if we want to move to git > > Now the decision we make for a) might influence some folks to make a > different decision for b). On the other hand, there is no point debating > a) if we are never going to move. > > So, how do folks want to approach this? > A: Vote to move to git and then figure out how best to use it? or > B: Agree our git workflows and then have a vote on moving to git with > those workflows? > > I'm leaning towards A myself. > > Mark > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@tomcat.apache.org > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@tomcat.apache.org
