Cool. It wasn't clear to me that that was available. On May 24, 2011, at 10:50 AM, Paul Lindner wrote:
> 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
