incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Dirk-Willem van Gulik <>
Subject Re: Subversion vs other source control systems
Date Thu, 14 Feb 2008 11:37:41 GMT

On Feb 14, 2008, at 12:25 PM, Ross Gardler wrote:

> Noel J. Bergman wrote:
>> J Aaron Farr wrote:
>>> J Aaron Farr wrote:
>>>>> git could be an issue.
>>>> Can you explain what the issue is with Git?
>>> Leo already gave a decent explanation.
>>> Basically, it comes down to two aspects:
>>>  1) infrastructure support
>>>  2) cultural bias
>> Only the first one is marginally correct, IMO.
>> Santiago wrote:
>>>> 1. You have to use subversion.
> Sorry, I've missed the thread that led to this, so sorry if I'm  
> repeating others.
> I understand that GiT can be used locally as a layer on top of SVN.  
> I believe this gives you most of the perceived benefits of GiT  
> locally without the need for a project itself to switch to GiT.

I am a bit lost here as well -- what does GiT add to the processes/ 
workflows common in the ASF ?

One of the great things about GiT is that you can can have lots of  
parallel and non-linear merges (every developer their own branch; lots  
of people merging the same patch into different sequences) -- and as  
such I can see it being perfectly tuned for, say, Linux.

However in the ASF most groups work roughly along fairly linear lines;  
with 'one' or just a 'few' points at which a patch is accepted - and  
essentially few, or just one, merge point (or a single line of merge  
points when backported). Rarely do we merge multiple 'HEAD's.

And I'd almost argue that SVN is a useful framework which helps us  
stay on the paved roads - where a single head progresses with group  
consensus and generally agreed merit.



To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message