Hey,
so it looks like nobody is really opposed to a git switch and some people would even prefer it (including me), I would like to suggest having a brainstorm on how a switch could look like, and a final decision whether to do the switch or not.
Some points to be considered:
1) I have generally good experience with repo.or.cz for hosting and I like that it concentrates on the bare minimum, but there are other hosters which could be considered. repo.or.cz also makes forking dead simple.
- I think there's already a (or the) git mirror on repo.or.cz, I guess that could be made writable and reused.
2) Git offers different ways of doing it. We could go for a more svn-like management where certain people are allowed to push to a main repo or we could do it like the linux kernel where a single person manages the mainline and pulls from all the other guys.
3) move geany-plugins as well?
I would very much like to see the switch! git-svn is a large pain in the arse.
Best regards.
Hey there,
Le 12/06/2010 16:33, Thomas Martitz a écrit :
Hey,
so it looks like nobody is really opposed to a git switch and some people would even prefer it (including me), I would like to suggest having a brainstorm on how a switch could look like, and a final decision whether to do the switch or not.
I personally like Git more than SVN, but I'm not sure a switch is needed if the ones for those it really change something aren't really interested -- especially since there is already a read-only Git repository.
Some points to be considered:
- I have generally good experience with repo.or.cz for hosting and I
like that it concentrates on the bare minimum, but there are other hosters which could be considered. repo.or.cz also makes forking dead simple.
- I think there's already a (or the) git mirror on repo.or.cz, I guess
that could be made writable and reused.
I think it'd be more natural to have the repo on SF since most of Geany stuff is there (bug tracker, SVN, etc.). Apart this, I've no thoughts on this point, I never used any of them for my own.
- Git offers different ways of doing it. We could go for a more
svn-like management where certain people are allowed to push to a main repo or we could do it like the linux kernel where a single person manages the mainline and pulls from all the other guys.
That's a maintainer choice but I feel more natural that the main developers (plurial, yes), say Encrico, Nick and Frank, have commit access. This would also allow for change to come in master even if one of the developers have not time to review, and I think that they are wise enough to do the right choices -- they do already anyway. But again, a maintainer's choice.
- move geany-plugins as well?
Would be definitively cool IMO :)
I would very much like to see the switch! git-svn is a large pain in the arse.
Agreed, even though I think git-svn pretty handy -- but yes, plain Git is better that the gateway hack.
Regards, Colomban
On 13 June 2010 00:33, Thomas Martitz thomas.martitz@student.htw-berlin.de wrote:
Hey,
so it looks like nobody is really opposed to a git switch
We havn't heard from Enrico yet, wait till after 0.19 release when he has some time to think :-)
and some people
would even prefer it (including me), I would like to suggest having a brainstorm on how a switch could look like, and a final decision whether to do the switch or not.
Yes, good idea
Some points to be considered:
- I have generally good experience with repo.or.cz for hosting and I like
that it concentrates on the bare minimum, but there are other hosters which could be considered. repo.or.cz also makes forking dead simple.
- I think there's already a (or the) git mirror on repo.or.cz, I guess that
could be made writable and reused.
Any host must support hosting cloned branches for long lasting changes like sm that need community testing and contribution, most people are on dynamic IP addresses and can't publish a local repo.
- Git offers different ways of doing it. We could go for a more svn-like
management where certain people are allowed to push to a main repo or we could do it like the linux kernel where a single person manages the mainline and pulls from all the other guys.
IMO the Linus model only really works if the main committer does it as their main job, works less well for projects where they are part time, even with several people doing it.
- move geany-plugins as well?
I would think so, it would be a big pain to have to use two differing systems when trying to keep these in sync. (at some point I'm sure there will have to be incompatible API changes that require plugin updates)
I would very much like to see the switch! git-svn is a large pain in the arse.
So much so that I use SVN to talk to the repo and git just locally on the working tree.
Cheers Lex
Best regards. _______________________________________________ Geany-devel mailing list Geany-devel@uvena.de http://lists.uvena.de/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geany-devel