incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Noel J. Bergman" <>
Subject RE: Subversion vs other source control systems
Date Mon, 18 Feb 2008 00:02:24 GMT
Santiago Gala wrote:
> I think git-svn abuses the server a lot, as the subversion server is not
> designed for copying of the whole history. 

AFAICS, that's an issue for the Infrastructure Team to address, not the Incubator.

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

> - faster commits, branch switching, pulls and pushs
> - merges, good and persistent merges
> - offline work, offline history diffs
> - rebasing is not such a "feature", but it can be useful sometimes
> - publishing lots of repositories helps surfacing patches that are
>   currently hidden until ready for sending/committing

The last one is almost antithetical to how we want people to work.  The first few are something
that you could raise with the Subversion folks on infra@.

> The inability of subversion to remember merged results makes working in
> a branch unpractical. Been there, done that, very tricky.

Raise any technical issues with the Subversion folks.

> Turning your "key poing" upside down: "We should not try to impose our
> practices using a technological tool, specially when doing so impairs
> development."

If there is a better SCM *for our way of working* raise that on infra@, too.

> people *against* changes in SCM is blaming a hypothetical introduction
> of git of breaking the ASF practices

No.  This is the wrong forum.  What we've said here is that there won't be any deviation from
the ASF infrastructure for source control; changing ASF infrastructure is out of scope for
the Incubator.

	--- Noel

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

View raw message