Re: [PHP-DEV] CVS to SVN Migration

2008-07-26 Thread Sebastian Deutsch

Rasmus Lerdorf schrieb:

Lukas Kahwe Smith wrote:

The git and hg integration with svn is also good so any developer who
prefers to have a local repository can very easily use either git or
hg and easily merge into the central svn repository.



However I think we should provide the infrastructure for developers to
setup a dvcs. I dont know if we want to standardize on a specific one.
But collaboration on exterimental stuff that requires a dvcs should be
possible on php.net servers.


What do you mean by that?  hgsvn and git-svn don't need any server-side 
support to enable you to work locally and do local git or hg checkins 
and then sync to the central svn repository when you are ready.


-Rasmus


It should not be a question of product, but of workflow. An example: A 
lot of time is needed when porting bugfixes from a stable branch to the 
development branch and vice versa. In my experience a DVCS reduces this 
time immense. PHP-SRC consists of a lot of branches (and tags) and the 
goal should be to port code as easy as possible between different branches.


Using a DVCS which is based on a direct acyclic graph (short DAG) can 
change the way you work with a VCS. Probably most of you who have worked 
with a DVCS know the technique of DaggyFixing 
(http://www.venge.net/mtn-wiki/DaggyFixes). Basically it means that a 
Bugfix is not committed to the revision where it is fixed, instead the 
Bugfix Graph is inserted right after the feature where the problem 
occurred and then the merge is propagated to the head revision.


If you take SVN and export it locally to a DVCS, then do some coding and 
reimport your patches, this advantages are probably lost (though I have 
to admit that I never tried it).


Sebastian

--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php



Re: [PHP-DEV] CVS to SVN Migration

2008-07-26 Thread Lukas Kahwe Smith


On 25.07.2008, at 12:44, Gwynne Raskind wrote:


On Jul 25, 2008, at 6:34 AM, Hannes Magnusson wrote:
At this point it's clear that moving from CVS to SVN for PHP has  
become a

more or less official project.

Has the phpdoc revision/translation problem been looked into/fixed?



No, not yet, but it will have to be. I intend for discussion on svn- 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] For the record, I will more or less ignore discussion  
that happens on internals@ on the subject; the idea of making a new  
list was to keep noise about the situation out of the ears of people  
who don't care. Especially with the 5.3 release coming, the last  
thing we need is extra noise without any means of categorizing.



Just FYI. I moved the original page with the migration work by Gwynne  
and added a landing page that is supposed to pull together all  
relevant content (since the conversion of cvs is just one task of many):

http://wiki.php.net/vcs/cvstosvnmigration

In case anyone has any other documents to store in regards to this  
general topic it should go into the vcs namespace as well.


regards,
Lukas Kahwe Smith
[EMAIL PROTECTED]




--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php



Re: [PHP-DEV] CVS to SVN Migration

2008-07-26 Thread Marcus Boerger
Hello Travis,

Friday, July 25, 2008, 9:27:02 PM, you wrote:

 Hello Marcus;

 Marcus Boerger wrote:
 A cvs read-only mirror would be nice to allow the old way of checking out
 stuff. But there I fail to see the reason to limit our selves to one
 additional other tool, nor do I see a reason to complicate matters even
 more by giving people other repositories that we somehow merge or not. SVN
 works everywhere and other tools can be used on top of it where ppl see
 that necessary but it is not the way PHP is being developed. Or do you want
 to change the whole of PHP development at the same time?
   

 I don't presume to speak for Lukas here, nor to believe we should 
 standardize on one particular alternative VCS (be it a DVCS or not).  I 
 think we should definitely go the SVN route as the only official way to 
 commit to PHP with possibly a read-only mirror on CVS that could be 
 phased out at some point in the future.

 That said, I think if someone is willing to step up to the plate and 
 offer bootstrap repositories for another VCS and is willing to help 
 support it for those who are interested in using it we would be remiss 
 in turning them down as it's no small undertaking.

 According to the wiki there are over  270k commits in php-src.  Using 
 Mono (90k - 100k commits) and my own experience with smaller 
 repositories (500 - 30k) as a guide, this means that to clone the entire 
 history of PHP via a `git svn clone` command would take nearly a week!  
 Using a bootstrap that is updated nightly, or even weekly, we can cut 
 that process down to  15 minutes.

 I've already volunteered on the svn-migrations list to work on an 
 unofficial mirror as soon as the SVN import is completed.  I would love 
 to see it make its way onto a php.net server so others who are 
 interested can benefit from the upfront work, but will be happy to host 
 it on one of my servers like the current git clone is.

Your help for such a git gateway is probably more than welcome ffrom the
git lovers. Personally I'd probably prefer HG for the task but who knows.
Anyway before we start with that we need to finish the SVN work because
else there is nothing to bridge to. And even though Gwynne has already
done a ton of work we still need to migrate all scripts. And hopefully
we rewrite them all in Python or PHP rather than in Perl which is what
we have right now.

Best regards,
 Marcus


-- 
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php



Re: [PHP-DEV] CVS to SVN Migration

2008-07-25 Thread marius popa
On Fri, Jul 25, 2008 at 5:06 AM, Gwynne Raskind
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 At this point it's clear that moving from CVS to SVN for PHP has become a
 more or less official project. As such, there is a new mailing list
isn't better to migrate to git or mercurial ?
http://weblog.rubyonrails.org/2008/4/2/rails-is-moving-from-svn-to-git
it's faster and better on my opinion (why wasting time to convert
later from svn to git )



 [EMAIL PROTECTED] for anyone who wants to help with the move. If
 you're familiar with what I've already done so far
 (http://wiki.php.net/svnmigration) and want to help, I beg you on my knees
 to subscribe (send a mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]) and
 let us know what you want to do :). It's past time for PHP to make this step
 a just a little bit further into the future and I hope we can work together
 to make it happen.

 -- Gwynne, Daughter of the Code
 This whole world is an asylum for the incurable.


 --
 PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
 To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php





-- 
developer flamerobin.org

-- 
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php



Re: [PHP-DEV] CVS to SVN Migration

2008-07-25 Thread Rasmus Lerdorf

marius popa wrote:

On Fri, Jul 25, 2008 at 5:06 AM, Gwynne Raskind
[EMAIL PROTECTED]  wrote:

At this point it's clear that moving from CVS to SVN for PHP has become a
more or less official project. As such, there is a new mailing list

isn't better to migrate to git or mercurial ?
http://weblog.rubyonrails.org/2008/4/2/rails-is-moving-from-svn-to-git
it's faster and better on my opinion (why wasting time to convert
later from svn to git )


We have 1000+ people with commit access, many of whom are not very 
technical.  We need something with mature Windows tools for those folks 
and something that isn't completely different to their way of working.


The git and hg integration with svn is also good so any developer who 
prefers to have a local repository can very easily use either git or hg 
and easily merge into the central svn repository.


We don't need to be on the bleeding edge of revision control systems. 
In fact, I prefer to very much be a very very slow follower in that 
particular area to make sure that all tools are extremely mature by the 
time we go anywhere near them.  The last thing we want to do is slow 
down PHP development any further by forcing people to fight with a 
bleeding edge set of tools.


When a winner eventually emerges in the de-centralized revision control 
world and everyone creates tools for all the various platforms, we'll 
have a look, but I predict that to be years away.


-Rasmus

--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php



Re: [PHP-DEV] CVS to SVN Migration

2008-07-25 Thread Lukas Kahwe Smith


On 25.07.2008, at 09:48, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:


marius popa wrote:

On Fri, Jul 25, 2008 at 5:06 AM, Gwynne Raskind
[EMAIL PROTECTED]  wrote:
At this point it's clear that moving from CVS to SVN for PHP has  
become a

more or less official project. As such, there is a new mailing list

isn't better to migrate to git or mercurial ?
http://weblog.rubyonrails.org/2008/4/2/rails-is-moving-from-svn-to- 
git

it's faster and better on my opinion (why wasting time to convert
later from svn to git )


We have 1000+ people with commit access, many of whom are not very  
technical.  We need something with mature Windows tools for those  
folks and something that isn't completely different to their way of  
working.


The git and hg integration with svn is also good so any developer  
who prefers to have a local repository can very easily use either  
git or hg and easily merge into the central svn repository.



However I think we should provide the infrastructure for developers to  
setup a dvcs. I dont know if we want to standardize on a specific one.  
But collaboration on exterimental stuff that requires a dvcs should be  
possible on php.net servers.


regards,
Lukas Kahwe Smith
[EMAIL PROTECTED]




--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php



Re: [PHP-DEV] CVS to SVN Migration

2008-07-25 Thread Rasmus Lerdorf

Lukas Kahwe Smith wrote:

The git and hg integration with svn is also good so any developer who
prefers to have a local repository can very easily use either git or
hg and easily merge into the central svn repository.



However I think we should provide the infrastructure for developers to
setup a dvcs. I dont know if we want to standardize on a specific one.
But collaboration on exterimental stuff that requires a dvcs should be
possible on php.net servers.


What do you mean by that?  hgsvn and git-svn don't need any server-side 
support to enable you to work locally and do local git or hg checkins 
and then sync to the central svn repository when you are ready.


-Rasmus

--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php



Re: [PHP-DEV] CVS to SVN Migration

2008-07-25 Thread Lukas Kahwe Smith


On 25.07.2008, at 10:11, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:


Lukas Kahwe Smith wrote:
The git and hg integration with svn is also good so any developer  
who

prefers to have a local repository can very easily use either git or
hg and easily merge into the central svn repository.



However I think we should provide the infrastructure for developers  
to
setup a dvcs. I dont know if we want to standardize on a specific  
one.
But collaboration on exterimental stuff that requires a dvcs should  
be

possible on php.net servers.


What do you mean by that?  hgsvn and git-svn don't need any server- 
side support to enable you to work locally and do local git or hg  
checkins and then sync to the central svn repository when you are  
ready.


I mean that if several people work on a changeset, that they still  
might want to have a join central repo. Of course dvcs allows direct  
exchange of patches as well, but it might still be a good idea to have  
this central dvcs repo for historical reasons (lets say some stuff is  
attempted, it is then abandonded and then picked up by someone else).


Also in terms of standardization I mean that even core developers can  
get overwhelmed if they end up having to use git here, and hg there.  
Then again we are still far away from having that many different  
subprojects that need dvcs.


regards,
Lukas Kahwe Smith
[EMAIL PROTECTED]




--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php



Re: [PHP-DEV] CVS to SVN Migration

2008-07-25 Thread David Soria Parra



However I think we should provide the infrastructure for developers to
setup a dvcs. I dont know if we want to standardize on a specific one.
But collaboration on exterimental stuff that requires a dvcs should be
possible on php.net servers.


Maybe it's just about having the possibilities for developers to share 
experimental trees on a php.net side so that people from outside can 
pull from it easily and not to remember a bunch of urls to get the trees 
of some developers working on interesting patchsets.


--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php



Re: [PHP-DEV] CVS to SVN Migration

2008-07-25 Thread Lukas Kahwe Smith


On 25.07.2008, at 10:25, Lars Strojny wrote:


Hi Rasmus,

Am Freitag, den 25.07.2008, 01:11 -0700 schrieb Rasmus Lerdorf:
[...]
What do you mean by that?  hgsvn and git-svn don't need any server- 
side

support to enable you to work locally and do local git or hg checkins
and then sync to the central svn repository when you are ready.


git-svn is really slow when you check out a huge repository. And PHP- 
SRC

will be huge. So it might be worth to export nightly git repos and to
provide a space for developers to create personal repositories from  
that

nightly repos for collaboration (think re2c, PDO_MYSQLND, etc. pp.)


BTW: I talked to some mercurial developers at a recent google code  
event here in Zurich. They said that their svn bridging is still not  
at the same level as that of git, but its being actively addressed.


regards,
Lukas Kahwe Smith
[EMAIL PROTECTED]




--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php



Re: [PHP-DEV] CVS to SVN Migration

2008-07-25 Thread Andrey Hristov

 Hi,
David Soria Parra wrote:



However I think we should provide the infrastructure for developers to
setup a dvcs. I dont know if we want to standardize on a specific one.
But collaboration on exterimental stuff that requires a dvcs should be
possible on php.net servers.


Maybe it's just about having the possibilities for developers to share 
experimental trees on a php.net side so that people from outside can 
pull from it easily and not to remember a bunch of urls to get the trees 
of some developers working on interesting patchsets.




launchpad allows you to create mirror Bazaar repos. The original can be 
svn or bazaar. This is how a bzr repo from Launchpad is provided, 
although the main repo is svn. Launchpad registration is free and easy.


Best,
Andrey

--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php



Re: [PHP-DEV] CVS to SVN Migration

2008-07-25 Thread Marcus Boerger
Hello Lukas,

Friday, July 25, 2008, 10:26:59 AM, you wrote:


 On 25.07.2008, at 10:25, Lars Strojny wrote:

 Hi Rasmus,

 Am Freitag, den 25.07.2008, 01:11 -0700 schrieb Rasmus Lerdorf:
 [...]
 What do you mean by that?  hgsvn and git-svn don't need any server- 
 side
 support to enable you to work locally and do local git or hg checkins
 and then sync to the central svn repository when you are ready.

 git-svn is really slow when you check out a huge repository. And PHP- 
 SRC
 will be huge. So it might be worth to export nightly git repos and to
 provide a space for developers to create personal repositories from  
 that
 nightly repos for collaboration (think re2c, PDO_MYSQLND, etc. pp.)

 BTW: I talked to some mercurial developers at a recent google code  
 event here in Zurich. They said that their svn bridging is still not  
 at the same level as that of git, but its being actively addressed.

I don't care for slow or fast. Becuase only about 10 people out of a 1000
or so will use any bridge to anywhere. We need to keep our fast development
for php-src, pecl, pear and docs running while improving our development
process at the same time. So far we didn't upgrade anywhere because non of
the tools did offer any real advantage for us - PHP. Subversion is the only
one that is not 10 or a 100 times more complex. In fact for 99% of our
repository users the change will limit to a one time checkout where a
dirrerent repository name, uri or whatever they will name it is being used
and when having to type svn instead of cvs. And as always one should
address the 99% and not the 1%. At leat I for one would prefer not to loose
too many contributers along the way. Either way with subversion 1.5 we get
not only general svn support for transactions and moving but also merge
tracking. Personally the killer feature here is transactions. And I don't
think I have to explain why. But whatever, no other tool is able to provide
what we want while being mature and working on all platforms at the same
timr.

This thread again shows the PHP development. A few people wanting to help
and endless amounts of people needing to mail anything they ever thought
of.

Best regards,
 Marcus


-- 
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php



Re: [PHP-DEV] CVS to SVN Migration

2008-07-25 Thread Lukas Kahwe Smith


On 25.07.2008, at 11:46, Marcus Boerger wrote:


I mean that if several people work on a changeset, that they still
might want to have a join central repo. Of course dvcs allows direct
exchange of patches as well, but it might still be a good idea to  
have

this central dvcs repo for historical reasons (lets say some stuff is
attempted, it is then abandonded and then picked up by someone else).



Also in terms of standardization I mean that even core developers can
get overwhelmed if they end up having to use git here, and hg there.
Then again we are still far away from having that many different
subprojects that need dvcs.


I still cannot follow you. Do you even know about these tools?


I have not used any of them enough in practice to really know them well.

If two parties use git or hg they are all fine. And everyone else is  
fine
too because they don' t have to learn dcms (btw, it's a distributed  
cms

as in code/configuraqtion management system:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Code_management_system). Anyway you  
don't want
to teach for example our documentation group to use git or hg.  
Besides the

fact thaqt there is no windows support for git they do not have the
slightest use whatsoever for local branching. Though of course  
anyone who

is can safely start it's own perfectly working local one.



The point is:
- re2c experimental work used git
- mysqlnd used bzr

If I am developer X and for some reason I wanted to be involved in the  
re2c and the mysqlnd stuff, then I would need to know both (or atleast  
have a stable and easy to use bridge between the two).


This is why I am suggesting to standardize on a dvcs.

Also as others have made it more clear than I did in my initial post.  
A central place for people to merge their pages upstream makes it  
easier for people to join/examine the development (even if the  
original people have abonded the effort), without having to hunt down  
people to get their changesets. It might also be a convenient way to  
prepare before the final push into our central repo. So again it would  
be useful to have some default space for teams to place the stable  
state of their collaboration.


Finally Lars also mentioned that it might be a good idea to keep a  
mirror of svn because creating a copy of current svn in some dvcs is  
not going to be instant. this again suggests it would make sense for  
us to standardize on a specific dvcs or we have to start offering  
mirrors for all candidates.


Hope I am not too far off-base with these observations ..

regards,
Lukas Kahwe Smith
[EMAIL PROTECTED]




--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php



Re: [PHP-DEV] CVS to SVN Migration

2008-07-25 Thread Johannes Schlüter
On Fri, 2008-07-25 at 10:26 +0200, David Soria Parra wrote:
  However I think we should provide the infrastructure for developers to
  setup a dvcs. I dont know if we want to standardize on a specific one.
  But collaboration on exterimental stuff that requires a dvcs should be
  possible on php.net servers.
 
 Maybe it's just about having the possibilities for developers to share 
 experimental trees on a php.net side so that people from outside can 
 pull from it easily and not to remember a bunch of urls to get the trees 
 of some developers working on interesting patchsets.

Sharing trees can also be done with svn. A repository structure might
look something like that:

root
+ active master tees
| + trunk
| + php 5.3
| \ ...
+ developer trees
| + johannes
| | \ my private play ground
| \ 
\ archive
  + php 5.2
  + php 5.1
  \ 

svn 1.5 should allow merging between these tree's, but all such things
should be discussed on the other, new list :-)

johannes

P.S. I'm a git fan boy but see good reasons against it for PHP


-- 
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php



Re: [PHP-DEV] CVS to SVN Migration

2008-07-25 Thread Hannes Magnusson
On Fri, Jul 25, 2008 at 04:06, Gwynne Raskind
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 At this point it's clear that moving from CVS to SVN for PHP has become a
 more or less official project.

Has the phpdoc revision/translation problem been looked into/fixed?

-Hannes

-- 
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php



Re: [PHP-DEV] CVS to SVN Migration

2008-07-25 Thread Scott MacVicar


On 25 Jul 2008, at 10:58, Lukas Kahwe Smith wrote:



On 25.07.2008, at 11:46, Marcus Boerger wrote:


I mean that if several people work on a changeset, that they still
might want to have a join central repo. Of course dvcs allows direct
exchange of patches as well, but it might still be a good idea to  
have
this central dvcs repo for historical reasons (lets say some stuff  
is
attempted, it is then abandonded and then picked up by someone  
else).


Also in terms of standardization I mean that even core developers  
can

get overwhelmed if they end up having to use git here, and hg there.
Then again we are still far away from having that many different
subprojects that need dvcs.


I still cannot follow you. Do you even know about these tools?


I have not used any of them enough in practice to really know them  
well.


If two parties use git or hg they are all fine. And everyone else  
is fine
too because they don' t have to learn dcms (btw, it's a distributed  
cms

as in code/configuraqtion management system:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Code_management_system). Anyway you  
don't want
to teach for example our documentation group to use git or hg.  
Besides the

fact thaqt there is no windows support for git they do not have the
slightest use whatsoever for local branching. Though of course  
anyone who

is can safely start it's own perfectly working local one.



The point is:
- re2c experimental work used git


We used svn, we converted the 5.3 branch to svn and then did an export  
at the end and merged back to CVS.




- mysqlnd used bzr

If I am developer X and for some reason I wanted to be involved in  
the re2c and the mysqlnd stuff, then I would need to know both (or  
atleast have a stable and easy to use bridge between the two).


This is why I am suggesting to standardize on a dvcs.

Also as others have made it more clear than I did in my initial  
post. A central place for people to merge their pages upstream makes  
it easier for people to join/examine the development (even if the  
original people have abonded the effort), without having to hunt  
down people to get their changesets. It might also be a convenient  
way to prepare before the final push into our central repo. So again  
it would be useful to have some default space for teams to place the  
stable state of their collaboration.


Finally Lars also mentioned that it might be a good idea to keep a  
mirror of svn because creating a copy of current svn in some dvcs is  
not going to be instant. this again suggests it would make sense for  
us to standardize on a specific dvcs or we have to start offering  
mirrors for all candidates.




With the svn hooks you can keep a mirror of CVS running and make t  
read only apart from commits to the svn repository. Those using  
cvsread would then not notice much difference.



Hope I am not too far off-base with these observations ..

regards,
Lukas Kahwe Smith
[EMAIL PROTECTED]




--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php



Scott


--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php



Re: [PHP-DEV] CVS to SVN Migration

2008-07-25 Thread Gwynne Raskind

On Jul 25, 2008, at 6:34 AM, Hannes Magnusson wrote:
At this point it's clear that moving from CVS to SVN for PHP has  
become a

more or less official project.

Has the phpdoc revision/translation problem been looked into/fixed?



No, not yet, but it will have to be. I intend for discussion on svn- 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] For the record, I will more or less ignore discussion that  
happens on internals@ on the subject; the idea of making a new list  
was to keep noise about the situation out of the ears of people who  
don't care. Especially with the 5.3 release coming, the last thing we  
need is extra noise without any means of categorizing.


-- Gwynne, Daughter of the Code
This whole world is an asylum for the incurable.




--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php



Re: [PHP-DEV] CVS to SVN Migration

2008-07-25 Thread Lukas Kahwe Smith


On 25.07.2008, at 12:41, Scott MacVicar wrote:



On 25 Jul 2008, at 10:58, Lukas Kahwe Smith wrote:



On 25.07.2008, at 11:46, Marcus Boerger wrote:


I mean that if several people work on a changeset, that they still
might want to have a join central repo. Of course dvcs allows  
direct
exchange of patches as well, but it might still be a good idea to  
have
this central dvcs repo for historical reasons (lets say some  
stuff is
attempted, it is then abandonded and then picked up by someone  
else).


Also in terms of standardization I mean that even core developers  
can
get overwhelmed if they end up having to use git here, and hg  
there.

Then again we are still far away from having that many different
subprojects that need dvcs.


I still cannot follow you. Do you even know about these tools?


I have not used any of them enough in practice to really know them  
well.


If two parties use git or hg they are all fine. And everyone else  
is fine
too because they don' t have to learn dcms (btw, it's a  
distributed cms

as in code/configuraqtion management system:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Code_management_system). Anyway you  
don't want
to teach for example our documentation group to use git or hg.  
Besides the

fact thaqt there is no windows support for git they do not have the
slightest use whatsoever for local branching. Though of course  
anyone who

is can safely start it's own perfectly working local one.



The point is:
- re2c experimental work used git


We used svn, we converted the 5.3 branch to svn and then did an  
export at the end and merged back to CVS.



Ah ok .. the point was just to provide an example that if its a free  
for all on what dvcs to use, it can make things harder for people that  
join/examine different experimental branches :)


regards,
Lukas Kahwe Smith
[EMAIL PROTECTED]




--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php



RE: [PHP-DEV] CVS to SVN Migration

2008-07-25 Thread Andi Gutmans
Hi Lukas,

We have already had several cases in the past where developers have
collaborated on a CVS branch. The main reason why this hasn't been
common practice is because CVS branching sucks and because some
developers didn't feel comfortable with using branches regardless of the
tool.

I think SVN goes quite far in making development in branches more
productive. I therefore see no reason why mysqlnd and re2c collaborators
could not just use an SVN branch. There is and has never been a rule not
to use branches in the main PHP repository for such collaborations.

My 2 Rappen :)

Andi


--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php



Re: [PHP-DEV] CVS to SVN Migration

2008-07-25 Thread Marcus Boerger
Hello Lukas,

Friday, July 25, 2008, 11:58:42 AM, you wrote:


 On 25.07.2008, at 11:46, Marcus Boerger wrote:

 I mean that if several people work on a changeset, that they still
 might want to have a join central repo. Of course dvcs allows direct
 exchange of patches as well, but it might still be a good idea to  
 have
 this central dvcs repo for historical reasons (lets say some stuff is
 attempted, it is then abandonded and then picked up by someone else).

 Also in terms of standardization I mean that even core developers can
 get overwhelmed if they end up having to use git here, and hg there.
 Then again we are still far away from having that many different
 subprojects that need dvcs.

 I still cannot follow you. Do you even know about these tools?

 I have not used any of them enough in practice to really know them well.

 If two parties use git or hg they are all fine. And everyone else is  
 fine
 too because they don' t have to learn dcms (btw, it's a distributed  
 cms
 as in code/configuraqtion management system:
 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Code_management_system). Anyway you  
 don't want
 to teach for example our documentation group to use git or hg.  
 Besides the
 fact thaqt there is no windows support for git they do not have the
 slightest use whatsoever for local branching. Though of course  
 anyone who
 is can safely start it's own perfectly working local one.


 The point is:
 - re2c experimental work used git

no we usde svn

 - mysqlnd used bzr

I can still contribute to mysql stuff as all that matters is the main
repository. If a smaller team forms and decides on bzr or git or hg then
they still have to synch with the main repository, be it cvs or svn. We did
the same with our re2c development. The advantage of svn over cvs is that
we get integration/migration support with the new tools.

 If I am developer X and for some reason I wanted to be involved in the  
 re2c and the mysqlnd stuff, then I would need to know both (or atleast  
 have a stable and easy to use bridge between the two).

 This is why I am suggesting to standardize on a dvcs.

There is no need to do so.

 Also as others have made it more clear than I did in my initial post.  
 A central place for people to merge their pages upstream makes it  
 easier for people to join/examine the development (even if the  
 original people have abonded the effort), without having to hunt down  
 people to get their changesets. It might also be a convenient way to  
 prepare before the final push into our central repo. So again it would  
 be useful to have some default space for teams to place the stable  
 state of their collaboration.

 Finally Lars also mentioned that it might be a good idea to keep a  
 mirror of svn because creating a copy of current svn in some dvcs is  
 not going to be instant. this again suggests it would make sense for  
 us to standardize on a specific dvcs or we have to start offering  
 mirrors for all candidates.

 Hope I am not too far off-base with these observations ..

A cvs read-only mirror would be nice to allow the old way of checking out
stuff. But there I fail to see the reason to limit our selves to one
additional other tool, nor do I see a reason to complicate matters even
more by giving people other repositories that we somehow merge or not. SVN
works everywhere and other tools can be used on top of it where ppl see
that necessary but it is not the way PHP is being developed. Or do you want
to change the whole of PHP development at the same time?





Best regards,
 Marcus


-- 
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php



Re: [PHP-DEV] CVS to SVN Migration

2008-07-25 Thread Daniel Brown
On Fri, Jul 25, 2008 at 5:15 AM, Richard Quadling
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 As a windows user my observations/opinions are ...

 taken with a grain of salt.  ;-P

Isn't discussion about how to add on to SVN and which tools will
be better-suited for development a decade from now counterproductive
to the idea at hand?  SVN and CVS are the industry standard right now,
with SVN being the better-supported and, in many ways, more economical
and prudent approach.  I'd be afraid that requiring existing and
future developers to learn newer technologies would stall several
aspects of the project, introduce many new problems, and hinder the
advancement of the language as a whole.

There's no reason other things couldn't be introduced at a later
point, but my personal preference would be to approach the migration
one step at a time.  Making small bits of progress over time (while
simultaneously being able to focus on PHP) seems to be more sensible
than trying to radically change everything at once, negating a proven
system in favor of what might work better.

-- 
/Daniel P. Brown
Better prices on dedicated servers:
Intel 2.4GHz/60GB/512MB/2TB $49.99/mo.
Intel 3.06GHz/80GB/1GB/2TB $59.99/mo.
Dedicated servers, VPS, and hosting from $2.50/mo.

-- 
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php



Re: [PHP-DEV] CVS to SVN Migration

2008-07-25 Thread Travis Swicegood

Hello Marcus;

Marcus Boerger wrote:

A cvs read-only mirror would be nice to allow the old way of checking out
stuff. But there I fail to see the reason to limit our selves to one
additional other tool, nor do I see a reason to complicate matters even
more by giving people other repositories that we somehow merge or not. SVN
works everywhere and other tools can be used on top of it where ppl see
that necessary but it is not the way PHP is being developed. Or do you want
to change the whole of PHP development at the same time?
  


I don't presume to speak for Lukas here, nor to believe we should 
standardize on one particular alternative VCS (be it a DVCS or not).  I 
think we should definitely go the SVN route as the only official way to 
commit to PHP with possibly a read-only mirror on CVS that could be 
phased out at some point in the future.


That said, I think if someone is willing to step up to the plate and 
offer bootstrap repositories for another VCS and is willing to help 
support it for those who are interested in using it we would be remiss 
in turning them down as it's no small undertaking.


According to the wiki there are over  270k commits in php-src.  Using 
Mono (90k - 100k commits) and my own experience with smaller 
repositories (500 - 30k) as a guide, this means that to clone the entire 
history of PHP via a `git svn clone` command would take nearly a week!  
Using a bootstrap that is updated nightly, or even weekly, we can cut 
that process down to  15 minutes.


I've already volunteered on the svn-migrations list to work on an 
unofficial mirror as soon as the SVN import is completed.  I would love 
to see it make its way onto a php.net server so others who are 
interested can benefit from the upfront work, but will be happy to host 
it on one of my servers like the current git clone is.


-T

--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php



[PHP-DEV] CVS to SVN Migration

2008-07-24 Thread Gwynne Raskind
At this point it's clear that moving from CVS to SVN for PHP has  
become a more or less official project. As such, there is a new  
mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] for anyone who wants to  
help with the move. If you're familiar with what I've already done so  
far (http://wiki.php.net/svnmigration) and want to help, I beg you  
on my knees to subscribe (send a mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
) and let us know what you want to do :). It's past time for PHP to  
make this step a just a little bit further into the future and I hope  
we can work together to make it happen.


-- Gwynne, Daughter of the Code
This whole world is an asylum for the incurable.


--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php