El dom, 17-02-2008 a las 19:02 -0500, Noel J. Bergman escribió: > Santiago Gala wrote: > > I think git-svn abuses the server a lot, as the subversion server is not > > designed for copying of the whole history. > > AFAICS, that's an issue for the Infrastructure Team to address, not the > Incubator. > > > > Dw wrote: > > > > I am a bit lost here as well -- what does GiT add to the processes/ > > > > workflows common in the ASF ? > > > - faster commits, branch switching, pulls and pushs > > - merges, good and persistent merges > > - offline work, offline history diffs > > - rebasing is not such a "feature", but it can be useful sometimes > > - publishing lots of repositories helps surfacing patches that are > > currently hidden until ready for sending/committing > > The last one is almost antithetical to how we want people to work. The first > few are something that you could raise with the Subversion folks on [EMAIL > PROTECTED] >
Can you elaborate on how is publishing what currently is hidden "antithetical to how we want people to work"? I think that getting a clear idea on this is important, as I always thought the ASF was about transparency and not keeping information hidden. And I think it is in scope, as the incubator is an important place for people to learn "our ways". > > The inability of subversion to remember merged results makes working in > > a branch unpractical. Been there, done that, very tricky. > > Raise any technical issues with the Subversion folks. > huh? why? > > Turning your "key poing" upside down: "We should not try to impose our > > practices using a technological tool, specially when doing so impairs > > development." > > If there is a better SCM *for our way of working* raise that on infra@, too. > > > people *against* changes in SCM is blaming a hypothetical introduction > > of git of breaking the ASF practices > > No. This is the wrong forum. What we've said here is that there won't be > any deviation from the ASF infrastructure for source control; changing ASF > infrastructure is out of scope for the Incubator. I already tried to move the discussion to [EMAIL PROTECTED], where I think it belongs, but people insists on answering here. Making requests to a closed team in a private list does not accord with *our way of working*, I think. And I don't think there is any need to use a private, unarchived list for discussions on infrastructure improvements. Regards Santiago > > --- Noel > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
