Re: [PROPOSAL] move repo to Git.

2015-03-25 Thread wolf . halton
Yes, thank you for the repetition. 

Wolf

Sent from my iPhone

 On Mar 8, 2015, at 12:15 PM, Marcus marcus.m...@wtnet.de wrote:
 
 Am 03/08/2015 04:52 PM, schrieb jan i:
 On Sunday, March 8, 2015, Marcusmarcus.m...@wtnet.de  wrote:
 
 Am 03/08/2015 02:08 AM, schrieb wolf.hal...@gmail.com:
 
 Why not move web development as well as the code development into Git?
 +1 any Git.
 
 the staging machine is relying on SVN. So, moving to Git would make
 changes on the website impossible - until someone rewrites the code that is
 doing the staging and publishing, so that it is (maybe additionally) also
 working with Git.
 
 Thats what I heard. It doesn't need to be the full truth but sounds logic
 for me. ;-)
 
 I think it was said before, we talk about the code not the website. Due to
 CMS we cannot currently move the web site so that will remain untouched in
 SVN.
 
 sure, I know that. But maybe Wolf had missed this. That's the reason why I 
 wrote it again. ;-)
 
 Marcus
 
 
 
  On Mar 1, 2015, at 6:59 PM, Dennis E. Hamiltondennis.hamil...@acm.org
 wrote:
 
 I'm going to add my +1 to this proposal.
 
 It occurred to me, when looking into the old OOo SVN dumps that Rob
 has, that there may be many more downstream users that are on Git and that
 our being on Git would facilitate accepting appropriately-offered pull
 requests to the AOO repository.  It seems this is a lower-friction way of
 sending fixes upstream than going the patch creation and submission route.
 
 - Dennis
 
 -Original Message-
 From: Jürgen Schmidt [mailto:jogischm...@gmail.com]
 Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2015 04:01
 To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
 Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] move repo to Git.
 
 [ ... ]
 
 If possible to get a git repo only it make sense. That means we don't
 have to move any webpage related stuff into git. Just the pure code is
 relevant her.
 
 +1 for a git repo
 
 Juergen
 
 -
 To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
 For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
 

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org



Re: [PROPOSAL] move repo to Git.

2015-03-08 Thread Marcus

Am 03/08/2015 02:08 AM, schrieb wolf.hal...@gmail.com:

Why not move web development as well as the code development into Git?
+1 any Git.


the staging machine is relying on SVN. So, moving to Git would make 
changes on the website impossible - until someone rewrites the code that 
is doing the staging and publishing, so that it is (maybe additionally) 
also working with Git.


Thats what I heard. It doesn't need to be the full truth but sounds 
logic for me. ;-)


Marcus




On Mar 1, 2015, at 6:59 PM, Dennis E. Hamiltondennis.hamil...@acm.org  wrote:

I'm going to add my +1 to this proposal.

It occurred to me, when looking into the old OOo SVN dumps that Rob has, that 
there may be many more downstream users that are on Git and that our being on Git would 
facilitate accepting appropriately-offered pull requests to the AOO repository.  It seems 
this is a lower-friction way of sending fixes upstream than going the patch creation and 
submission route.

- Dennis

-Original Message-
From: Jürgen Schmidt [mailto:jogischm...@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2015 04:01
To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] move repo to Git.

[ ... ]

If possible to get a git repo only it make sense. That means we don't
have to move any webpage related stuff into git. Just the pure code is
relevant her.

+1 for a git repo

Juergen


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org



Re: [PROPOSAL] move repo to Git.

2015-03-08 Thread Marcus

Am 03/08/2015 04:52 PM, schrieb jan i:

On Sunday, March 8, 2015, Marcusmarcus.m...@wtnet.de  wrote:


Am 03/08/2015 02:08 AM, schrieb wolf.hal...@gmail.com:


Why not move web development as well as the code development into Git?
+1 any Git.



the staging machine is relying on SVN. So, moving to Git would make
changes on the website impossible - until someone rewrites the code that is
doing the staging and publishing, so that it is (maybe additionally) also
working with Git.

Thats what I heard. It doesn't need to be the full truth but sounds logic
for me. ;-)


I think it was said before, we talk about the code not the website. Due to
CMS we cannot currently move the web site so that will remain untouched in
SVN.


sure, I know that. But maybe Wolf had missed this. That's the reason why 
I wrote it again. ;-)


Marcus




  On Mar 1, 2015, at 6:59 PM, Dennis E. Hamiltondennis.hamil...@acm.org

wrote:

I'm going to add my +1 to this proposal.

It occurred to me, when looking into the old OOo SVN dumps that Rob
has, that there may be many more downstream users that are on Git and that
our being on Git would facilitate accepting appropriately-offered pull
requests to the AOO repository.  It seems this is a lower-friction way of
sending fixes upstream than going the patch creation and submission route.

- Dennis

-Original Message-
From: Jürgen Schmidt [mailto:jogischm...@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2015 04:01
To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] move repo to Git.

[ ... ]

If possible to get a git repo only it make sense. That means we don't
have to move any webpage related stuff into git. Just the pure code is
relevant her.

+1 for a git repo

Juergen


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org



Re: [PROPOSAL] move repo to Git.

2015-03-08 Thread jan i
On Sunday, March 8, 2015, Marcus marcus.m...@wtnet.de wrote:

 Am 03/08/2015 02:08 AM, schrieb wolf.hal...@gmail.com:

 Why not move web development as well as the code development into Git?
 +1 any Git.


 the staging machine is relying on SVN. So, moving to Git would make
 changes on the website impossible - until someone rewrites the code that is
 doing the staging and publishing, so that it is (maybe additionally) also
 working with Git.

 Thats what I heard. It doesn't need to be the full truth but sounds logic
 for me. ;-)

I think it was said before, we talk about the code not the website. Due to
CMS we cannot currently move the web site so that will remain untouched in
SVN.

currently (as far as I can see) the web site is not part of the RO GIT
mirror.

rgds
jan i




 Marcus



  On Mar 1, 2015, at 6:59 PM, Dennis E. Hamiltondennis.hamil...@acm.org
 wrote:

 I'm going to add my +1 to this proposal.

 It occurred to me, when looking into the old OOo SVN dumps that Rob
 has, that there may be many more downstream users that are on Git and that
 our being on Git would facilitate accepting appropriately-offered pull
 requests to the AOO repository.  It seems this is a lower-friction way of
 sending fixes upstream than going the patch creation and submission route.

 - Dennis

 -Original Message-
 From: Jürgen Schmidt [mailto:jogischm...@gmail.com]
 Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2015 04:01
 To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
 Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] move repo to Git.

 [ ... ]

 If possible to get a git repo only it make sense. That means we don't
 have to move any webpage related stuff into git. Just the pure code is
 relevant her.

 +1 for a git repo

 Juergen


 -
 To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
 For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org



-- 
Sent from My iPad, sorry for any misspellings.


Re: [PROPOSAL] move repo to Git.

2015-03-07 Thread wolf . halton
Why not move web development as well as the code development into Git?
+1 any Git. 

Sent from my iPhone

 On Mar 1, 2015, at 6:59 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton dennis.hamil...@acm.org 
 wrote:
 
 I'm going to add my +1 to this proposal.
 
 It occurred to me, when looking into the old OOo SVN dumps that Rob has, 
 that there may be many more downstream users that are on Git and that our 
 being on Git would facilitate accepting appropriately-offered pull requests 
 to the AOO repository.  It seems this is a lower-friction way of sending 
 fixes upstream than going the patch creation and submission route.
 
 - Dennis
 
 -Original Message-
 From: Jürgen Schmidt [mailto:jogischm...@gmail.com] 
 Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2015 04:01
 To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
 Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] move repo to Git.
 
 [ ... ]
 
 If possible to get a git repo only it make sense. That means we don't
 have to move any webpage related stuff into git. Just the pure code is
 relevant her.
 
 +1 for a git repo
 
 Juergen
 
 
 -
 To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
 For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
 
 
 -
 To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
 For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
 

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org



RE: [PROPOSAL] move repo to Git.

2015-03-01 Thread Dennis E. Hamilton
I'm going to add my +1 to this proposal.

It occurred to me, when looking into the old OOo SVN dumps that Rob has, that 
there may be many more downstream users that are on Git and that our being on 
Git would facilitate accepting appropriately-offered pull requests to the AOO 
repository.  It seems this is a lower-friction way of sending fixes upstream 
than going the patch creation and submission route.

 - Dennis

-Original Message-
From: Jürgen Schmidt [mailto:jogischm...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2015 04:01
To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] move repo to Git.

[ ... ]

If possible to get a git repo only it make sense. That means we don't
have to move any webpage related stuff into git. Just the pure code is
relevant her.

+1 for a git repo

Juergen


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org



Re: [PROPOSAL] move repo to Git.

2015-02-18 Thread Yuri Dario
Hi,

a bit late...

having worked with both svn and git, personally I don't think git it 
is easier to use.

Given how AOO is developed, it seems to me that cloned repos are not 
necessary, developers are already working on svn repo.



-- 
Bye,

Yuri Dario



-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org



RE: [PROPOSAL] move repo to Git.

2015-02-18 Thread Dennis E. Hamilton
 with all 
committed changes made on that branch.  This will happen instantaneously, 
especially for small experimental branches.

In a common situation, in working out a small change, for example, you can sync 
your working copy (set to master) with the Apache origin, then merge the branch 
to master, resolve any conflicts that might arise, and then push the resulting 
changes with the merged branch back to the origin.  I've done that.  I haven't 
had to deal with any collisions on Corinthia yet, but I have had them elsewhere 
and it is intriguing how that works.

I have also made throw-away branches where I was experimenting and then simply 
left the branch to die.  I think I deleted such a branch (although it does not 
really disappear), but I've forgotten.

WHAT ABOUT NON-COMMITTERS

Non-committers can't push back to the origin server.  But they can clone and do 
everything on their clone-tied working copy as anyone (just as for an SVN 
check-out).

They need to learn how to derive patches and submit them, ideally attached to 
issues.  (I have not broken the code on that.  My diffs refer to locations in 
my local file system, and I haven't figured out how to get around that yet.)

But non-committers and even committers (on a very large project) have another 
way to do this, so long as their clone is accessible on the Internet (on 
GitHub, say).  Someone working on a clone can develop a branch that they 
propose for inclusion in the origin.  They can issue a pull-request to the 
origin.  This notifies someone who is supporting the origin repo that there is 
a request and they can review the request, inspect what the changes are, and 
choose to selectively pull the changed material to the origin repo, preserving 
the branch or not depending on circumstances.  

There are some involved matters about requiring an iCLA from anyone making a 
substantial pull request and ASF has some rules about how provenance is 
preserved while requiring that a committer be the one to make the commits to 
the origin repo.  I haven't gotten into this very much at all, since I am a 
Corinthia committer and we've received no pull requests at this point.  

Linus Torvalds has an interesting way of working with these for the Linux 
Kernel.  The pull requests get to what are called lieutenants who are experts 
on various parts of the kernel.  The lieutenants review pull requests and make 
any change to *their* clone of the kernel repo.  Then the lieutenants make pull 
requests upstream to Linus, who then can do the same, satisfy himself, and do 
the pull.  (I think it is a bit more streamlined than that, so no one has to go 
through too many steps to review and accept/reject the many pull requests that 
come in.)  That doesn't quite fit the organization of Apache Projects and how 
there is no hierarchy of committers, so I haven't dug too far into it.  My 
picture here is therefore rather sketchy. 

-Original Message-
From: Yuri Dario [mailto:mc6...@mclink.it] 
Sent: Wednesday, February 18, 2015 02:54
To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] move repo to Git.

Hi,

a bit late...

having worked with both svn and git, personally I don't think git it 
is easier to use.

Given how AOO is developed, it seems to me that cloned repos are not 
necessary, developers are already working on svn repo.



-- 
Bye,

Yuri Dario



-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org



Re: [PROPOSAL] move repo to Git.

2015-02-17 Thread Jürgen Schmidt
On 16/02/15 19:01, Kay Schenk wrote:

 
 
 I'm just curious  about these statements. Have potential new developers
 remarked on this to you?
 Since most IDEs support a variety of version control mechanisms, I'm
 wondering how the suggestion to switch to git might have emerged. But,
 again, I have never used git and it might be the coolest thing ever -- I
 have NO idea! :)
 
 

If it would have been possible to have a git repo from the beginning
then we would have one already. The majority of active developers in the
past prefer a git reopo and the git tooling in general.

If possible to get a git repo only it make sense. That means we don't
have to move any webpage related stuff into git. Just the pure code is
relevant her.

+1 for a git repo

Juergen


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org



Re: [PROPOSAL] move repo to Git.

2015-02-16 Thread Kay Schenk
On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 9:53 AM, jan i j...@apache.org wrote:

 On 13 February 2015 at 18:13, Kay Schenk kay.sch...@gmail.com wrote:

  On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 3:43 AM, jan i j...@apache.org wrote:
 
   Hi.
  
   We have now for a while had a readonly Git copy of our svn repo.
  
   Should we move to a full git repo, making it easier for new developers
 to
   participate (although it is in no way a guarantee, that it will attract
  new
   people) by lowering the barrier.
  
   For more documentation on Git at Apache see
  https://git-wip-us.apache.org/
  
   Moving to a full git repo (see http://git.apache.org/), would mean
  giving
   up our current SVN repo, but history etc. will be available in Git
  instead.
  
   The choice is there, and it is just a matter of how people want to
 work.
  
   thoughts ?
  
   rgds
   jan I.
  
 
  I'm not sure I understand the comment about making things easier but then
  I'm not a git user currently. I'm good with svn.
  I know we have read only git right now.
 

 I did not mean for you and me, and others who are used to svn...using GIT
 might make it just a little bit easier for new developers.

 I have no strong feelings for the one or other solution, I am simply seeing
 it as a possibility to lower the level required to help.

 rgds
 jan I.



I'm just curious  about these statements. Have potential new developers
remarked on this to you?
Since most IDEs support a variety of version control mechanisms, I'm
wondering how the suggestion to switch to git might have emerged. But,
again, I have never used git and it might be the coolest thing ever -- I
have NO idea! :)




 
 
 
 
  --
 
 
 -
  MzK
 
  An old horse for a long, hard road,
   a young pony for a quick ride.
  -- Texas Bix Bender
 




-- 
-
MzK

An old horse for a long, hard road,
 a young pony for a quick ride.
-- Texas Bix Bender


Re: [PROPOSAL] move repo to Git.

2015-02-16 Thread Marcus

Am 02/15/2015 02:19 PM, schrieb Andrea Pescetti:

So, from what I can understand, the GIT repository would only replace
these three directories:

http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/openoffice/trunk/
(which would become the master branch)
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/openoffice/branches/
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/openoffice/tags/
(which would become GIT branches and tags respectively).

All the rest in http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/openoffice/ would stay
unchanged and continue to be managed through SVN, which means that this
has no impact on people who work on the site and on translators who
commit files.


OK, if so then I'm out of the game and fine with changing to Git.

Marcus


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org



RE: [PROPOSAL] move repo to Git.

2015-02-16 Thread Dennis E. Hamilton
 -- replying in-line to --
From: Kay Schenk [mailto:kay.sch...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Monday, February 16, 2015 10:01
To: OOo Apache
Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] move repo to Git.

[ ... ]


I'm just curious  about these statements. Have potential new developers
remarked on this to you?
Since most IDEs support a variety of version control mechanisms, I'm
wondering how the suggestion to switch to git might have emerged. But,
again, I have never used git and it might be the coolest thing ever -- I
have NO idea! :)


orcmid
   I think there are many developers who only use Git and clamor for the
   familiar.  There is also tool religion involved.

   It takes some brain rewiring to get your head around how git works for
   an user, but it becomes easy after that. 

   The plus is that every working copy has the entire history, not just
   the latest of things.  Synchronizing with a master is an interesting
   process, and handling branches is particularly easy if you are careful.
   Collisions are handled in an intriguing way too.

   It is easy to start a branch in a working copy for testing an idea
   and getting it working, then merging it back to the main branch 
   before synchronizing with an upstream master.  This doesn't clutter
   the upstream and if you are careful to keep pulling down any changes
   from upstream before merging your branch, it can go very nicely.

   I did a Microsoft Virtual Academy on-line class on Git support in
   Visual Studio.  That was a trip.
/orcmid


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org



Re: [PROPOSAL] move repo to Git.

2015-02-16 Thread Andrea Pescetti

On 16/02/2015 Kay Schenk wrote:

again, I have never used git and it might be the coolest thing ever


It does have a reputation for being cool. This is justified in many 
cases, less justified in others. I know some developers who refuse to 
work with SVN in principle; true, maybe they would be perfectly 
comfortable with git-svn or even with a recent version of SVN; but 
relying on SVN is a factor that may scare new developers away. That 
said, before moving we should ensure that those who work on the code are 
happy: new developers can perfectly use git already now to checkout the 
code and to submit patches.


Regards,
  Andrea.

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org



Re: [PROPOSAL] move repo to Git.

2015-02-15 Thread Andrea Pescetti

On 13/02/2015 jan i wrote:

Should we move to a full git repo, making it easier for new developers to
participate (although it is in no way a guarantee, that it will attract new
people) by lowering the barrier.


(Sorry if you already got this message: I'm experiencing problems and 
delays with Apache e-mails this weekend)


So, from what I can understand, the GIT repository would only replace 
these three directories:


http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/openoffice/trunk/
(which would become the master branch)
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/openoffice/branches/
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/openoffice/tags/
(which would become GIT branches and tags respectively).

All the rest in http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/openoffice/ would stay 
unchanged and continue to be managed through SVN, which means that this 
has no impact on people who work on the site and on translators who 
commit files.


I am OK with the change but we should wait for the opinion of the other 
committers who routinely commit to the above directories, since they are 
the only ones who will see an impact.


Note that it is known, from previous conversations, that this will 
require some scripts to be adapted. One of them is the SVNBot that sends 
notifications to Bugzilla depending on commit messages. Another one is 
the script that generates filenames and metadata for the buildbots 
http://ci.apache.org/projects/openoffice/index.html and now relies on 
the SVN revision number. Nothing impossible of course, but we need to be 
aware of it.


Regards,
  Andrea.

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org



Re: [PROPOSAL] move repo to Git.

2015-02-15 Thread Andrea Pescetti

Dennis E. Hamilton wrote:

OK.  Then what is the point of github_team.txt?


Vanity only. People will see the Apache badge when looking at your 
Github profile. So this has little in common with this discussion, which 
is about two tools (svn and git) both hosted at Apache.


Regards,
  Andrea.

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org



RE: [PROPOSAL] move repo to Git.

2015-02-15 Thread Dennis E. Hamilton
Got it.  Sorry for wasting everyone's time.

 - Dennis

-Original Message-
From: Andrea Pescetti [mailto:pesce...@apache.org] 
Sent: Sunday, February 15, 2015 04:49
To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] move repo to Git.

Dennis E. Hamilton wrote:
 OK.  Then what is the point of github_team.txt?

Vanity only. People will see the Apache badge when looking at your 
Github profile. So this has little in common with this discussion, which 
is about two tools (svn and git) both hosted at Apache.

Regards,
   Andrea.

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org



RE: [PROPOSAL] move repo to Git.

2015-02-15 Thread Dennis E. Hamilton
 -- replying in-line to --
From: jan i [mailto:j...@apache.org] 
Sent: Saturday, February 14, 2015 13:36
To: dev; Dennis Hamilton
Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] move repo to Git.

On 14 February 2015 at 22:27, Dennis E. Hamilton dennis.hamil...@acm.org
wrote:

 Corinthia has its code tree (not web site) on Git.  There is a mirror on
 GitHub as Apache/incubator-corinthia.

 Even then I was unable to do a push to the mirror although I went through
 the ceremony to pair my Apache ID and my GitHub ID.

 From that factoid, I have to conclude that all mirrors are read-only or my
 pairing is not working.  I am not certain how to tell the difference.

Well I did tell you earlieryou cannot push to a mirror, you have to
push to the canonical repo (git://git.apache.org/incubator-corinthia.git)

This is true for any GIT repo, and not only ASF.

orcmid
OK.  Then what is the point of github_team.txt?  I notice that I am listed
as a member of the Apache project at GitHub although github_team.txt still 
lists my application as pending.  (I did just change my entry at GitHub
to Public from Private.)
/orcmid

rgds
jan I.


  - Dennis

 -Original Message-
 From: Dennis E. Hamilton [mailto:dennis.hamil...@acm.org]
 Sent: Friday, February 13, 2015 10:41
 To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
 Subject: RE: [PROPOSAL] move repo to Git.

 [ ... ]

  2. Although I have paired my apache.org ID and my GitHub ID and it was
 confirmed a couple of months ago, I cannot do a Sync that pushes a small
 change from my computer to the GitHub repo.  So I get that there is no good
 way to push to GitHub for this repo.

 [ ... ]


 -
 To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
 For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org




-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org



Re: [PROPOSAL] move repo to Git.

2015-02-15 Thread Herbert Duerr

Hi Pedro,


I don't currently use git but what I use is not really important:
if a move to git were to be considered, it would only make sense
if we can rescue the pre-apache history and in particular the
Hg CWSs.


Most of the open-source history has been preserved. I talked about this 
in my last year's FOSDEM presentation [1]. The code history was provided 
a big git repository in a 2GB blob [2]. Unzip it and start your favorite 
git tool to explore it (e.g. gitk --all).


[1] http://people.apache.org/~hdu/HistOOory_Presentation.pdf
[2] http://people.apache.org/~hdu/HistOOory_lastest.zip

Herbert

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org



Re: [PROPOSAL] move repo to Git.

2015-02-14 Thread Mechtilde
Hello,

personally I prefer Git. But this doens't matter

Who do the administration of the core code like branch and merge and so on?

These persons should get the best free tool being available.

Kind regards

Mechtilde Stehmann
---
## Apache OpenOffice.org
## Freie Office Suite für Linux, MacOSX, Windows
## PGP encryption welcome
## Key-ID 0x141AAD7F



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Re: [PROPOSAL] move repo to Git.

2015-02-14 Thread Dave Fisher
Hi -

In SVN you can choose parts of the repository. In Git it is all or none.

If we move to GIT then please either leave both websites out of this move - or 
create separate git repositories for each.

Also does Apache offer an SVN Mirror for GIT?

Regards,
Dave

On Feb 13, 2015, at 11:10 PM, Mechtilde wrote:

 Hello,
 
 personally I prefer Git. But this doens't matter
 
 Who do the administration of the core code like branch and merge and so on?
 
 These persons should get the best free tool being available.
 
 Kind regards
 
 Mechtilde Stehmann
 ---
 ## Apache OpenOffice.org
 ## Freie Office Suite für Linux, MacOSX, Windows
 ## PGP encryption welcome
 ## Key-ID 0x141AAD7F
 


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org



RE: [PROPOSAL] move repo to Git.

2015-02-14 Thread Dennis E. Hamilton
Corinthia has its code tree (not web site) on Git.  There is a mirror on GitHub 
as Apache/incubator-corinthia.

Even then I was unable to do a push to the mirror although I went through the 
ceremony to pair my Apache ID and my GitHub ID.  

From that factoid, I have to conclude that all mirrors are read-only or my 
pairing is not working.  I am not certain how to tell the difference.

 - Dennis

-Original Message-
From: Dennis E. Hamilton [mailto:dennis.hamil...@acm.org] 
Sent: Friday, February 13, 2015 10:41
To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
Subject: RE: [PROPOSAL] move repo to Git.

[ ... ]

 2. Although I have paired my apache.org ID and my GitHub ID and it was 
confirmed a couple of months ago, I cannot do a Sync that pushes a small change 
from my computer to the GitHub repo.  So I get that there is no good way to 
push to GitHub for this repo. 

[ ... ]


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org



Re: [PROPOSAL] move repo to Git.

2015-02-14 Thread jan i
On 14 February 2015 at 22:27, Dennis E. Hamilton dennis.hamil...@acm.org
wrote:

 Corinthia has its code tree (not web site) on Git.  There is a mirror on
 GitHub as Apache/incubator-corinthia.

 Even then I was unable to do a push to the mirror although I went through
 the ceremony to pair my Apache ID and my GitHub ID.

 From that factoid, I have to conclude that all mirrors are read-only or my
 pairing is not working.  I am not certain how to tell the difference.

Well I did tell you earlieryou cannot push to a mirror, you have to
push to the canonical repo (git://git.apache.org/incubator-corinthia.git)

This is true for any GIT repo, and not only ASF.

rgds
jan I.


  - Dennis

 -Original Message-
 From: Dennis E. Hamilton [mailto:dennis.hamil...@acm.org]
 Sent: Friday, February 13, 2015 10:41
 To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
 Subject: RE: [PROPOSAL] move repo to Git.

 [ ... ]

  2. Although I have paired my apache.org ID and my GitHub ID and it was
 confirmed a couple of months ago, I cannot do a Sync that pushes a small
 change from my computer to the GitHub repo.  So I get that there is no good
 way to push to GitHub for this repo.

 [ ... ]


 -
 To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
 For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org




RE: [PROPOSAL] move repo to Git.

2015-02-13 Thread Dennis E. Hamilton
I don’t understand the response.  I said GitHub Mirror, which anyone can make a 
push request to from another GitHub repo (a GitHub fork) and from a clone of 
the Mirror not on GitHub.  If I push a change to the OpenOffice Mirror on 
GitHub, won’t the pull of those changes show up in the AOO SVN and the AOO Git 
wherever it is (since I am a recognized ASF committer)?
 
Is this not the easy case for newcomers?  Is this not supported with the AOO 
Mirror on GitHub already?
 
I also notice that the GitHub app will work with a local repo clone that is not 
from a GitHub repo as well (at least on Windows).  That is how I push and pull 
with the incubator-corinthia repository on ASF infrastructure. 
 
If there are now more Git commits than SVN commits, don’t the pulls of those 
also end up in the SVN?  I thought there was bidirectional synchronization.
 
Can you please explain what doesn’t work already?  Although I use the AOO SVN, 
I don’t think I miss any commits made via Git.  How am I mistaken?
 
Is this rather a concern for infrastructure server demand and performance?
 
-   Dennis
 
From: jan i [mailto:j...@apache.org] 
Sent: Friday, February 13, 2015 04:41
To: dev; Dennis Hamilton
Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] move repo to Git.
 
 
 
On 13 February 2015 at 13:13, Dennis E. Hamilton dennis.hamil...@acm.org 
mailto:dennis.hamil...@acm.org  wrote:
Isn't having the mirror on GitHub an effective way to push changes to the SVN, 
especially for Apache committers who have project rights to the GitHub repo?  
Non-committer pull requests are as complicated either way, it seems to me, and 
the GitHub mirror might be superior for that.
no it is not. You cannot push from github to either git or svn at apache.
Please be aware that I wrote git, not github. ASF has its own git server, which 
is mandatory to use.
 

I assume the proposal is do-able, but I wonder what kind of disruption cost 
there is for current work.
Well it is not only do-able, at the moment about half of all ASF projects work 
that way. The disruption cost is an infra ticket, and about 3-4 hours downtime.
We have today more git commits than svn commits.
rgds
jan i.
 

 - Dennis

Below, I have no opinion, just wonder if these are also relevant considerations?

PS: Our current SVN repo is also used for source control of openoffice.org 
http://openoffice.org , So I assume it is not a total give-up.  Also, we have 
SVN tags and branches that might be problematic, I think.

PPS: The AOO repo is also a bit larger than what Linus apparently thinks is 
cool.  This gets back to how could the AOO repo be refactored in order to 
modularize the software and simplify (re-)building and staged evolution of 
features.

-Original Message-
From: jan i [mailto:j...@apache.org mailto:j...@apache.org ]
Sent: Friday, February 13, 2015 03:44
To: dev
Subject: [PROPOSAL] move repo to Git.

Hi.

We have now for a while had a readonly Git copy of our svn repo.

Should we move to a full git repo, making it easier for new developers to
participate (although it is in no way a guarantee, that it will attract new
people) by lowering the barrier.

For more documentation on Git at Apache see https://git-wip-us.apache.org/

Moving to a full git repo (see http://git.apache.org/), would mean giving
up our current SVN repo, but history etc. will be available in Git instead.

The choice is there, and it is just a matter of how people want to work.

thoughts ?

rgds
jan I.


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org 
mailto:dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org 
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org 
mailto:dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org 
 


Re: [PROPOSAL] move repo to Git.

2015-02-13 Thread jan i
On Friday, February 13, 2015, Dennis E. Hamilton dennis.hamil...@acm.org
wrote:

 I don’t understand the response.  I said GitHub Mirror, which anyone can
 make a push request to from another GitHub repo (a GitHub fork) and from a
 clone of the Mirror not on GitHub.  If I push a change to the OpenOffice
 Mirror on GitHub, won’t the pull of those changes show up in the AOO SVN
 and the AOO Git wherever it is (since I am a recognized ASF committer)?

no it will not,because it is a mirror and not the canocial repo.



 Is this not the easy case for newcomers?  Is this not supported with the
 AOO Mirror on GitHub already?

no it is not, fisrt of all our current mirror is read only.


 I also notice that the GitHub app will work with a local repo clone that
 is not from a GitHub repo as well (at least on Windows).  That is how I
 push and pull with the incubator-corinthia repository on ASF infrastructure.

 If there are now more Git commits than SVN commits, don’t the pulls of
 those also end up in the SVN?  I thought there was bidirectional
 synchronization.

no there is not a bidirectional sync, it is either svn or git at the
canocial repo.


 Can you please explain what doesn’t work already?  Although I use the AOO
 SVN, I don’t think I miss any commits made via Git.  How am I mistaken?

may I please suggest you read the links I gave.


 Is this rather a concern for infrastructure server demand and performance?

no idea what you mean.

rgds
jan I



 -   Dennis

 From: jan i [mailto:j...@apache.org javascript:;]
 Sent: Friday, February 13, 2015 04:41
 To: dev; Dennis Hamilton
 Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] move repo to Git.



 On 13 February 2015 at 13:13, Dennis E. Hamilton dennis.hamil...@acm.org
 javascript:; mailto:dennis.hamil...@acm.org javascript:;  wrote:
 Isn't having the mirror on GitHub an effective way to push changes to the
 SVN, especially for Apache committers who have project rights to the GitHub
 repo?  Non-committer pull requests are as complicated either way, it seems
 to me, and the GitHub mirror might be superior for that.
 no it is not. You cannot push from github to either git or svn at apache.
 Please be aware that I wrote git, not github. ASF has its own git server,
 which is mandatory to use.


 I assume the proposal is do-able, but I wonder what kind of disruption
 cost there is for current work.
 Well it is not only do-able, at the moment about half of all ASF projects
 work that way. The disruption cost is an infra ticket, and about 3-4 hours
 downtime.
 We have today more git commits than svn commits.
 rgds
 jan i.


  - Dennis

 Below, I have no opinion, just wonder if these are also relevant
 considerations?

 PS: Our current SVN repo is also used for source control of openoffice.org
 http://openoffice.org , So I assume it is not a total give-up.  Also,
 we have SVN tags and branches that might be problematic, I think.

 PPS: The AOO repo is also a bit larger than what Linus apparently thinks
 is cool.  This gets back to how could the AOO repo be refactored in order
 to modularize the software and simplify (re-)building and staged evolution
 of features.

 -Original Message-
 From: jan i [mailto:j...@apache.org javascript:; mailto:j...@apache.org
 javascript:; ]
 Sent: Friday, February 13, 2015 03:44
 To: dev
 Subject: [PROPOSAL] move repo to Git.

 Hi.

 We have now for a while had a readonly Git copy of our svn repo.

 Should we move to a full git repo, making it easier for new developers to
 participate (although it is in no way a guarantee, that it will attract new
 people) by lowering the barrier.

 For more documentation on Git at Apache see https://git-wip-us.apache.org/

 Moving to a full git repo (see http://git.apache.org/), would mean giving
 up our current SVN repo, but history etc. will be available in Git instead.

 The choice is there, and it is just a matter of how people want to work.

 thoughts ?

 rgds
 jan I.


 -
 To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
 javascript:; mailto:dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
 javascript:;
 For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
 javascript:; mailto:dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org javascript:;



-- 
Sent from My iPad, sorry for any misspellings.


Re: [PROPOSAL] move repo to Git.

2015-02-13 Thread Marcus

Am 02/13/2015 06:13 PM, schrieb Kay Schenk:

On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 3:43 AM, jan ij...@apache.org  wrote:


Hi.

We have now for a while had a readonly Git copy of our svn repo.

Should we move to a full git repo, making it easier for new developers to
participate (although it is in no way a guarantee, that it will attract new
people) by lowering the barrier.

For more documentation on Git at Apache see https://git-wip-us.apache.org/

Moving to a full git repo (see http://git.apache.org/), would mean giving
up our current SVN repo, but history etc. will be available in Git instead.

The choice is there, and it is just a matter of how people want to work.

thoughts ?

rgds
jan I.



I'm not sure I understand the comment about making things easier but then
I'm not a git user currently. I'm good with svn.
I know we have read only git right now.


I'm not a core developer but working here and there on the website. So, 
at least I don't need Git - of course that's not counting. ;-)


However, does staging and publishing the website also work via Git?

Regarding the argument to attract more new developers:
I don't know if this is the reality as I haven't see any comment from 
newbies like If you would use Git I would start working or similar. 
So, I'm not sure if a change would give us more developers.


When changing then it will be more because of technical reasons - like 
branching could be easier than in SVN.


My 2 ct.

Marcus


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org



RE: [PROPOSAL] move repo to Git.

2015-02-13 Thread Dennis E. Hamilton
OK, I finally cloned Apache/OpenOffice from GitHub.

I learned two things:

 1. The git repo takes just under 3GB on my hard drive.  That's considerably 
less than the 4.35GB SVN working copy for the AOO SVN trunk.

 2. Although I have paired my apache.org ID and my GitHub ID and it was 
confirmed a couple of months ago, I cannot do a Sync that pushes a small change 
from my computer to the GitHub repo.  So I get that there is no good way to 
push to GitHub for this repo. 

 3. I also cloned and made a push to Apache/commons-cli and this also reported 
that I evidently do not have permission to do that.  Am I to conclude that my 
pairing of IDs is failing or is it the case that all Apache repos on GitHub are 
read-only mirrors?

As I said, I have no objection to the proposal and I have confirmed a problem 
that it definitely solves for committers at least.

 - Dennis

-Original Message-
From: jan i [mailto:j...@apache.org] 
Sent: Friday, February 13, 2015 09:04
To: dev@openoffice.apache.org; dennis.hamil...@acm.org
Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] move repo to Git.

On Friday, February 13, 2015, Dennis E. Hamilton dennis.hamil...@acm.org
wrote:

 I don’t understand the response.  I said GitHub Mirror, which anyone can
 make a push request to from another GitHub repo (a GitHub fork) and from a
 clone of the Mirror not on GitHub.  If I push a change to the OpenOffice
 Mirror on GitHub, won’t the pull of those changes show up in the AOO SVN
 and the AOO Git wherever it is (since I am a recognized ASF committer)?

no it will not,because it is a mirror and not the canocial repo.



 Is this not the easy case for newcomers?  Is this not supported with the
 AOO Mirror on GitHub already?

no it is not, fisrt of all our current mirror is read only.


 I also notice that the GitHub app will work with a local repo clone that
 is not from a GitHub repo as well (at least on Windows).  That is how I
 push and pull with the incubator-corinthia repository on ASF infrastructure.

 If there are now more Git commits than SVN commits, don’t the pulls of
 those also end up in the SVN?  I thought there was bidirectional
 synchronization.

no there is not a bidirectional sync, it is either svn or git at the
canocial repo.


 Can you please explain what doesn’t work already?  Although I use the AOO
 SVN, I don’t think I miss any commits made via Git.  How am I mistaken?

may I please suggest you read the links I gave.


 Is this rather a concern for infrastructure server demand and performance?

no idea what you mean.

rgds
jan I



 -   Dennis

 From: jan i [mailto:j...@apache.org javascript:;]
 Sent: Friday, February 13, 2015 04:41
 To: dev; Dennis Hamilton
 Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] move repo to Git.



 On 13 February 2015 at 13:13, Dennis E. Hamilton dennis.hamil...@acm.org
 javascript:; mailto:dennis.hamil...@acm.org javascript:;  wrote:
 Isn't having the mirror on GitHub an effective way to push changes to the
 SVN, especially for Apache committers who have project rights to the GitHub
 repo?  Non-committer pull requests are as complicated either way, it seems
 to me, and the GitHub mirror might be superior for that.
 no it is not. You cannot push from github to either git or svn at apache.
 Please be aware that I wrote git, not github. ASF has its own git server,
 which is mandatory to use.


 I assume the proposal is do-able, but I wonder what kind of disruption
 cost there is for current work.
 Well it is not only do-able, at the moment about half of all ASF projects
 work that way. The disruption cost is an infra ticket, and about 3-4 hours
 downtime.
 We have today more git commits than svn commits.
 rgds
 jan i.


  - Dennis

 Below, I have no opinion, just wonder if these are also relevant
 considerations?

 PS: Our current SVN repo is also used for source control of openoffice.org
 http://openoffice.org , So I assume it is not a total give-up.  Also,
 we have SVN tags and branches that might be problematic, I think.

 PPS: The AOO repo is also a bit larger than what Linus apparently thinks
 is cool.  This gets back to how could the AOO repo be refactored in order
 to modularize the software and simplify (re-)building and staged evolution
 of features.

 -Original Message-
 From: jan i [mailto:j...@apache.org javascript:; mailto:j...@apache.org
 javascript:; ]
 Sent: Friday, February 13, 2015 03:44
 To: dev
 Subject: [PROPOSAL] move repo to Git.

 Hi.

 We have now for a while had a readonly Git copy of our svn repo.

 Should we move to a full git repo, making it easier for new developers to
 participate (although it is in no way a guarantee, that it will attract new
 people) by lowering the barrier.

 For more documentation on Git at Apache see https://git-wip-us.apache.org/

 Moving to a full git repo (see http://git.apache.org/), would mean giving
 up our current SVN repo, but history etc. will be available in Git instead.

 The choice is there, and it is just a matter of how people want to work.

 thoughts

Re: [PROPOSAL] move repo to Git.

2015-02-13 Thread jan i
On 13 February 2015 at 18:13, Kay Schenk kay.sch...@gmail.com wrote:

 On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 3:43 AM, jan i j...@apache.org wrote:

  Hi.
 
  We have now for a while had a readonly Git copy of our svn repo.
 
  Should we move to a full git repo, making it easier for new developers to
  participate (although it is in no way a guarantee, that it will attract
 new
  people) by lowering the barrier.
 
  For more documentation on Git at Apache see
 https://git-wip-us.apache.org/
 
  Moving to a full git repo (see http://git.apache.org/), would mean
 giving
  up our current SVN repo, but history etc. will be available in Git
 instead.
 
  The choice is there, and it is just a matter of how people want to work.
 
  thoughts ?
 
  rgds
  jan I.
 

 I'm not sure I understand the comment about making things easier but then
 I'm not a git user currently. I'm good with svn.
 I know we have read only git right now.


I did not mean for you and me, and others who are used to svn...using GIT
might make it just a little bit easier for new developers.

I have no strong feelings for the one or other solution, I am simply seeing
it as a possibility to lower the level required to help.

rgds
jan I.






 --

 -
 MzK

 An old horse for a long, hard road,
  a young pony for a quick ride.
 -- Texas Bix Bender



Re: [PROPOSAL] move repo to Git.

2015-02-13 Thread Regina Henschel

Hi Jan,

jan i schrieb:

Hi.

We have now for a while had a readonly Git copy of our svn repo.

Should we move to a full git repo, making it easier for new developers to
participate (although it is in no way a guarantee, that it will attract new
people) by lowering the barrier.

For more documentation on Git at Apache see https://git-wip-us.apache.org/

Moving to a full git repo (see http://git.apache.org/), would mean giving
up our current SVN repo, but history etc. will be available in Git instead.

The choice is there, and it is just a matter of how people want to work.

thoughts ?


I do not think, that a move is needed. New developers without commit 
rights do not need it, because they create patches.


I'm surely no professional developer and commit only patches from time 
to time. I use git svn and that works for me.


Kind regards
Regina


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org



Re: [PROPOSAL] move repo to Git.

2015-02-13 Thread Pedro Giffuni

Hello;

I don't currently use git but what I use is not really important:
if a move to git were to be considered, it would only make sense
if we can rescue the pre-apache history and in particular the
Hg CWSs.

Just my $0.02,

Pedro.

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org



Re: [PROPOSAL] move repo to Git.

2015-02-13 Thread Kay Schenk
On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 3:43 AM, jan i j...@apache.org wrote:

 Hi.

 We have now for a while had a readonly Git copy of our svn repo.

 Should we move to a full git repo, making it easier for new developers to
 participate (although it is in no way a guarantee, that it will attract new
 people) by lowering the barrier.

 For more documentation on Git at Apache see https://git-wip-us.apache.org/

 Moving to a full git repo (see http://git.apache.org/), would mean giving
 up our current SVN repo, but history etc. will be available in Git instead.

 The choice is there, and it is just a matter of how people want to work.

 thoughts ?

 rgds
 jan I.


I'm not sure I understand the comment about making things easier but then
I'm not a git user currently. I'm good with svn.
I know we have read only git right now.




-- 
-
MzK

An old horse for a long, hard road,
 a young pony for a quick ride.
-- Texas Bix Bender


Re: [PROPOSAL] move repo to Git.

2015-02-13 Thread Alexandro Colorado
I think is a good idea to use Git as a full fledge repo.

+1

On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 12:13 PM, Kay Schenk kay.sch...@gmail.com wrote:

 On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 3:43 AM, jan i j...@apache.org wrote:

  Hi.
 
  We have now for a while had a readonly Git copy of our svn repo.
 
  Should we move to a full git repo, making it easier for new developers to
  participate (although it is in no way a guarantee, that it will attract
 new
  people) by lowering the barrier.
 
  For more documentation on Git at Apache see
 https://git-wip-us.apache.org/
 
  Moving to a full git repo (see http://git.apache.org/), would mean
 giving
  up our current SVN repo, but history etc. will be available in Git
 instead.
 
  The choice is there, and it is just a matter of how people want to work.
 
  thoughts ?
 
  rgds
  jan I.
 

 I'm not sure I understand the comment about making things easier but then
 I'm not a git user currently. I'm good with svn.
 I know we have read only git right now.




 --

 -
 MzK

 An old horse for a long, hard road,
  a young pony for a quick ride.
 -- Texas Bix Bender




-- 
Alexandro Colorado
Apache OpenOffice Contributor
882C 4389 3C27 E8DF 41B9  5C4C 1DB7 9D1C 7F4C 2614


RE: [PROPOSAL] move repo to Git.

2015-02-13 Thread Dennis E. Hamilton
Isn't having the mirror on GitHub an effective way to push changes to the SVN, 
especially for Apache committers who have project rights to the GitHub repo?  
Non-committer pull requests are as complicated either way, it seems to me, and 
the GitHub mirror might be superior for that.

I assume the proposal is do-able, but I wonder what kind of disruption cost 
there is for current work.

 - Dennis

Below, I have no opinion, just wonder if these are also relevant considerations?

PS: Our current SVN repo is also used for source control of openoffice.org, So 
I assume it is not a total give-up.  Also, we have SVN tags and branches that 
might be problematic, I think.

PPS: The AOO repo is also a bit larger than what Linus apparently thinks is 
cool.  This gets back to how could the AOO repo be refactored in order to 
modularize the software and simplify (re-)building and staged evolution of 
features.  

-Original Message-
From: jan i [mailto:j...@apache.org] 
Sent: Friday, February 13, 2015 03:44
To: dev
Subject: [PROPOSAL] move repo to Git.

Hi.

We have now for a while had a readonly Git copy of our svn repo.

Should we move to a full git repo, making it easier for new developers to
participate (although it is in no way a guarantee, that it will attract new
people) by lowering the barrier.

For more documentation on Git at Apache see https://git-wip-us.apache.org/

Moving to a full git repo (see http://git.apache.org/), would mean giving
up our current SVN repo, but history etc. will be available in Git instead.

The choice is there, and it is just a matter of how people want to work.

thoughts ?

rgds
jan I.


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org



Re: [PROPOSAL] move repo to Git.

2015-02-13 Thread jan i
On 13 February 2015 at 13:13, Dennis E. Hamilton dennis.hamil...@acm.org
wrote:

 Isn't having the mirror on GitHub an effective way to push changes to the
 SVN, especially for Apache committers who have project rights to the GitHub
 repo?  Non-committer pull requests are as complicated either way, it seems
 to me, and the GitHub mirror might be superior for that.

no it is not. You cannot push from github to either git or svn at apache.

Please be aware that I wrote git, not github. ASF has its own git server,
which is mandatory to use.



 I assume the proposal is do-able, but I wonder what kind of disruption
 cost there is for current work.

Well it is not only do-able, at the moment about half of all ASF projects
work that way. The disruption cost is an infra ticket, and about 3-4 hours
downtime.

We have today more git commits than svn commits.

rgds
jan i.



  - Dennis

 Below, I have no opinion, just wonder if these are also relevant
 considerations?

 PS: Our current SVN repo is also used for source control of openoffice.org,
 So I assume it is not a total give-up.  Also, we have SVN tags and branches
 that might be problematic, I think.

 PPS: The AOO repo is also a bit larger than what Linus apparently thinks
 is cool.  This gets back to how could the AOO repo be refactored in order
 to modularize the software and simplify (re-)building and staged evolution
 of features.

 -Original Message-
 From: jan i [mailto:j...@apache.org]
 Sent: Friday, February 13, 2015 03:44
 To: dev
 Subject: [PROPOSAL] move repo to Git.

 Hi.

 We have now for a while had a readonly Git copy of our svn repo.

 Should we move to a full git repo, making it easier for new developers to
 participate (although it is in no way a guarantee, that it will attract new
 people) by lowering the barrier.

 For more documentation on Git at Apache see https://git-wip-us.apache.org/

 Moving to a full git repo (see http://git.apache.org/), would mean giving
 up our current SVN repo, but history etc. will be available in Git instead.

 The choice is there, and it is just a matter of how people want to work.

 thoughts ?

 rgds
 jan I.


 -
 To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
 For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org