Your objections seem to be based on the assumption that you would need to have push access to all repositories, but I think that's the point of DCVS, you can just fork them, and then people can pull your changes in themselves (or using a tool). Pull requests could even be generated when things are out of sync.
I think it's quite possible this could make i18n/L10n work easier, not more difficult. - Trevor On Mar 22, 2011, at 7:25 AM, Siebrand Mazeland wrote: > From what I understand, common thought is that phase3 and all individual > extensions, as well as directories in trunk/ aside from extensions and > phase3 will be their own repos. Possibly there will be meta collections > that allow cloning things in one go, but that does not allow committing to > multiple repos in one go without requiring scripting. This is a use case > that is used *a lot* by L10n committers and others. I think this is bad. > > I am raising my objections against GIT as a replacement VCS for > MediaWiki's svn.wikimedia.org and the way people are talking about > implementing it again from an i18n perspective, and also from a > community/product stability perspective. > > I raised this in the thread "Migrating to GIT (extensions)"[1,2] mid > February. My concerns have not been taken away. i18n/L10n maintenance will > be a lot harder and more distributed. In my opinion the MediaWiki > development community is not harmed by the continued use of Subversion. In > fact, the global maintenance - I define this as fixing backward > incompatibilities introduced in core in the 400+ extensions in Subversion, > as well as updating extensions to current coding standard - that many > active developers are involved in now, will likely decrease IMO, because > having to commit to multiple repos will make it more cumbersome to perform > these activities. Things that require extra work by a developer without > any obvious benefits out are just discontinued in my experience. As a > consequence, the number of unmaintained and crappy extensions will > increase, which is bad for the product image and in the end for the > community - not caring about that single extension repo is too easy, and > many [devs] not caring about hundreds [of extensions] is even worse. > > Please convince me that things will not be as hard as I describe above, or > will most definitely not turn out as I fear. I am open to improvements, > but moving to GIT without addressing these concerns for the sake of having > this great DVCS is not justified IMO. > > Siebrand > > > M: +31 6 50 69 1239 > Skype: siebrand > > [1] > http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/2011-February/thread.html#5 > 1812 > > [2] > http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/2011-February/051817.html > > > On 22-03-11 10:15 Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 08:27, Yuvi Panda <[email protected]> wrote: >>> On Sun, Mar 20, 2011 at 9:25 PM, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason >>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> But actually the reason I did this mirror was as a proof of concept >>>> for a (still incomplete) conversion to Git. >>>> >>>> Is there still interest in that? I don't have a lot of time for it, >>>> but I could help with that if people want to go that way. >>> >>> If lack of people dedicated to this is why a migration isn't being >>> considered (I guess not), I volunteer myself. >> >> Lack of time and people is indeed a factor. The import we have now >> isn't a proper Git conversion. >> >> I still have some vague notes here detailing approximately what we >> need, some of these are out of date. The "Split up and convert" >> section is somewhat accurate though: >> >> http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Git_conversion >> >> No SVN to Git tool does exactly what we need due to our messy >> history. I came to the conclusion that it was probably easiest to >> filter the SVN dump (to e.g. fix up branch paths) before feeding the >> history to one of these tools. >> >> Of course even if we come up with a perfect conversion it's pretty >> much useless if Wikimedia doesn't want to use it for its main >> repositories. So getting a yes/no on whether this is wanted by WM >> before you proceed with something would prevent you/others from >> wasting their time on this. > > > > _______________________________________________ > Wikitech-l mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
