You can clone the apache git mirror and send pull requests that way. It's a little more work for the committer but it is doable.
On Tue, May 24, 2011 at 8:11 AM, Perry Smith <[email protected]> wrote: > I'm watching this project (still) from a very distant perspective. I think > Dan's thoughts are very real. > > I tend to contribute to many open source projects from GCC to Ruby, etc etc > etc. > > There is nothing more beautiful than a github pull request to a person like > me. I can pull down a repo, make my change, and make my pull request and > not get bogged down with tons of unproductive ick. And I bet from the > receiving side, it is equally pleasant. I know that I'm going to resist > long and hard doing changes with a SVN base. > > I might be the only person like this but I suspect I'm not. You might want > to review the contributors to Rails 3 and notice how many contributors make > only one or two changes. > > I know that Apache wants you to do SVN but having a way to do git and git > pull requests I believe will be worth the work. > > On May 24, 2011, at 12:55 AM, Yuri Z wrote: > > > I agree with James. > > > > 2011/5/24 James Purser <[email protected]> > > > >> Honestly I think our best bet is to go with the Apache SVN setup until > such > >> time as Apache git is available. > >> > >> Saves a massive amount of faffing around > >> > >> 2011/5/24 Daniel Danilatos <[email protected]> > >> > >>> Hi guys, > >>> > >>> Bruno mentioned a good idea and I'd like to share my thoughts on this > >>> matter. > >>> > >>> My impression so far is that everyone here prefers to use git; so, why > >>> not just use it and then have a job that immediately mirrors commits > >>> to the master branch straight into SVN. That way we still get all the > >>> integration with the rest of the tools, and get to use a source > >>> control system that meets the needs and wishes of the community. I am > >>> willing to do the leg work to get things set up, if it helps. > >>> > >>> If I dare say it, using a distributed VCS like git also has the > >>> advantages of cross-pollination with other services and groups. The > >>> ability to clone the whole repository and make significant changes > >>> with the knowledge that merging back in is feasible significantly > >>> lowers the barrier for people to experiment, try things out, share, > >>> etc. This would be in my opinion a great boon to our efforts to > >>> attract interest, contributions, and build this community. > >>> > >>> Best of both worlds? > >>> > >>> Dan > >>> > >>> Στις 24 Μαΐου 2011 4:12 π.μ., ο χρήστης Michael MacFadden > >>> <[email protected]> έγραψε: > >>>> I agree. > >>>> > >>>> I realize that people view git and mercurial as the "to be state" for > >>> source control and that going to SVN is probably seen as a step > backward > >>> from where we are today. I happen to largely agree personally. That > >> being > >>> said, I think we should just bite the bullet and move to SVN. The > >> reality > >>> is that it is not going to kill us. Hopefully apache will move to HG > or > >> Git > >>> sooner than later. If we feel strongly about it, maybe we could > >> volunteer > >>> to help. > >>>> > >>>> ~Michael > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> On May 23, 2011, at 11:00 AM, Upayavira wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> I would not recommend that. There is no timescale applied to this - > it > >>>>> could be six months, it could be two years, depending upon volunteer > >>>>> efforts. > >>>>> > >>>>> Wave should aim to go straight to SVN. If Git is available later, > then > >>>>> maybe a switch can be arranged. > >>>>> > >>>>> Upayavira > >>>>> > >>>>> On Mon, 23 May 2011 20:43 +0300, "Yuri Z" <[email protected]> wrote: > >>>>>> Great news! > >>>>>> Maybe then it worth to wait with code migration... > >>>>>> > >>>>>> 2011/5/23 Paul Lindner <[email protected]> > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> Apache is working on a way to officially support git: > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>> > >> > https://svn.apache.org/repos/infra/infrastructure/trunk/projects/git/THE-PLAN-SO-FAR > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> If you want git instead of svn then I'd suggest helping get the > >>> outstanding > >>>>>>> tickets resolved. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 9:34 AM, Ali Lown <[email protected]> wrote: > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Unfortunately, I don't see anyway for apache to setup a git > >>> repository. > >>>>>>>> Their whole system is based around SVN. The best they seem to be > >> able > >>>>>>>> to offer is a git mirror[0] > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> [0]:http://git.apache.org/ > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> 2011/5/23 Daniel Danilatos <[email protected]>: > >>>>>>>>> I like the hg->git part! :) > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> Στις 23 Μαΐου 2011 2:43 π.μ., ο χρήστης Yuri Z < > [email protected] > >>> > >>>>>>>> έγραψε: > >>>>>>>>>> Regarding hg->svn migration: > >>>>>>>>>> I was lately investigating how to proceed with It and it seems > >> like > >>>>>>> the > >>>>>>>> best > >>>>>>>>>> way is first to convert from mercurial to git, and then from git > >> to > >>>>>>> svn. > >>>>>>>>>> Here are the links: hg->git > >>>>>>>>>> http://hivelogic.com/articles/converting-from-mercurial-to-git/ > >>>>>>>>>> < > http://hivelogic.com/articles/converting-from-mercurial-to-git/ > >>>> git > >>>>>>> -> > >>>>>>>> svn > >>>>>>>>>> : http://code.google.com/p/support/wiki/ImportingFromGit > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> 2011/5/22 Michael MacFadden <[email protected]> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> All, > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> Now that we are rolling on Jira, I think it's time to start > >>> thinking > >>>>>>>> about > >>>>>>>>>>> migrating to the apache SVN. Can we set a goal timeframe for > >>> this? > >>>>>>> To > >>>>>>>> do > >>>>>>>>>>> this I would recommend any one who is working on a large > >>> outstanding > >>>>>>>> project > >>>>>>>>>>> in their own workspace to try to wrap those up. We probably > >> want > >>> a > >>>>>>>> fairly > >>>>>>>>>>> stable and complete snapshot to move over to avoid disrupting > >>> peoples > >>>>>>>> work. > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> We'll also need to think about how we handle code reviews since > >>>>>>> apache > >>>>>>>> has > >>>>>>>>>>> ReviewBoard set up by default. Some have voiced a preference > >> for > >>>>>>>> sticking > >>>>>>>>>>> with Rietveld. I suppose this is an option, however we might > >> need > >>> to > >>>>>>>> move > >>>>>>>>>>> the review site off of waveprotocol.org since that site will > >>>>>>>> eventually > >>>>>>>>>>> not be for WiaB development. We should compare and contrast > >>> Review > >>>>>>>> Board as > >>>>>>>>>>> well. Thanks. > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> ~Michael > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> -- > >>>>>>> Paul Lindner -- [email protected] -- linkedin.com/in/plindner > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>> > >> > >> > >> > >> -- > >> James Purser > >> Collaborynth > >> http://collaborynth.com.au > >> Mob: +61 406 576 553 > >> Wave: [email protected] > >> > > -- Paul Lindner -- [email protected] -- linkedin.com/in/plindner
