1) volunteers are working on git hosting, but it's taking longer than we expected. Additional volunteers are welcome- start by subscribiing to [email protected] (a public list).
2) svn has improved its merging capabilities since you last ran ooo on it. 3) as I mentioned our svn infrastructure performs well. we even have a transparent mirror in europe to cut down on cross-atlantic latency. ----- Original Message ---- > From: Stephan Bergmann <[email protected]> > To: [email protected] > Sent: Mon, June 13, 2011 4:00:25 PM > Subject: Re: Proposed short term goals > > What are the reasons? Is it "just" that there is no appropriate > infrastructure in place, or is there some general rule that Apache projects > must run on svn instead of something else? > > I'm asking because currently OOo runs on hg, and the short time we did run > on svn (after cvs, before hg), things were not working really ideally for > us. > > -Stephan > > On Mon, Jun 13, 2011 at 9:39 PM, Joe Schaefer <[email protected]>wrote: > > > Not at this time, no. FWIW our Subversion server is very responsive, > > even for largish codebases (yay SSDs). > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ---- > > > From: Damjan Jovanovic <[email protected]> > > > To: [email protected] > > > Sent: Mon, June 13, 2011 3:37:53 PM > > > Subject: Re: Proposed short term goals > > > > > > OO.o is a very large project, it might be overkill for Subversion. Is > > > Git an option? > > > > > > Damjan > > >
