On Jun 11, 2008, at 12:20 PM, Doug Cutting wrote:
David Reiss wrote:
We have been doing this a little differently. I prefer to have all
of
the development in one place instead of having to look around at
everyone's repository. We have one central repository (with a
mirror)
and everyone posts their branches there. Whether they also use
GitHub
on the side is up to them.
There's really no need to use a central repository for git users, IMO,
people should be free to choose their own publishing point. There is
not much difference in:
git pull . pri/<somebody>/<branch> // which is equivalent to git merge
pri/<somebody>/<branch>
and
git pull <somebodys_remote> <branch>
where <somebodys_remote> can be either be the full Git url or
configured by: git remote add <remote> <url>
I wouldn't mind a backup in the pri/... branches though.
This needs to be well documented. Also, will non-Git users need to
consult this "one place"?
I think non-git users should just stick to the subversion respository,
which should be the "official" repository for the Apache project. The
official branches (trunk and releases) needs to be sync'ed (with git-
svn) regularly using a post-commit hook in the "semi-official" git
repository, which is the merge point of Git users.
__Luke
