On Fri, 2013-11-15 at 07:22 -0700, Gobeille, Robert wrote: > On Nov 15, 2013, at 3:52 AM, Meier, Roger <[email protected]> wrote: > > My experience with git vs. svn on open source projects is > > - git enables easier merges, cherry-picking, etc. > > - work offline with the whole commit history > > - many projects changed from svn to git and got more contributors > > - Signed-Off-By and Tested-By can be used for review workflow > > - projects hosted on gitlab, github or gitorious allow users to fork repos, > > they > > can send back their changes easily via pull request to the origin > > project > > => speed up and simplify contributions significantly > > > > Regarding to the trouble, many git clients(gui and commandline) are > > available and > > as easy to use as svn clients. > > > > Main difference is the evolution from centralized to distributed version > > control. > > If the majority of code developers want to change, I’ll go along with it. I > think in this case it makes sense to classify a code developer as anyone who > has contributed a code change (either by submitting a patch or that has svn > access). I’ll also take votes from anyone who says they would contribute if > we moved to git. Fair enough?
I have a slight preference for git for FOSSology. But, full disclosure: my last FOSSology commit was in 2012, so my input may be weighted accordingly. If FO were to adopt git, would we host it thru sourceforge or github (or other)? Github is by far the most popular git hosting service. It also offers bug tracking, wiki, and other project hosting features. I don't want this to snowball into a huge new effort, but a move to github might imply we should re-evaluate our project hosting arrangements. Dan _______________________________________________ fossology mailing list [email protected] http://lists.fossology.org/mailman/listinfo/fossology
