You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@myfaces.apache.org by Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org> on 2009/05/14 08:56:30 UTC
Re: [source control] git and the ASF ...
On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 12:14 PM, Werner Punz <we...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Matthias Wessendorf schrieb:
>>
>> Hi fellow contributors and committers,
>>
>> a recently common asked question is:
>> "Is it possible for an ASF project (-> myfaces and its subprojects) to
>> use git ?"
>>
>> The answer is:
>> Yes and no. All projects need to use svn as the central store of all
>> source code, but individual committers and contributors can use git as
>> an "alternative svn client". See http://git.apache.org/ and
>> http://wiki.apache.org/general/GitAtApache for the currently available
>> tools and some initial documentation.
>>
>> So, question is now, do we (Apache MyFaces) want such a read-only git
>> mirror ?
>>
>> If yes, I'd be more than happy to run this on the
>> "infrastructure-dev@apache.org" list.
>>
> Just to give a short summary why a read only mirror is preferrable over
> a full git-svn checkout.
> The git mirror would allow git deltas to be downloaded instead of single
> svn commits, which would make the initial checkout (git mirror) way faster!
>
> As for svn externals, git-svn cannot deal with externals directly
> but there are workarounds like using git subprojects or
> using symlinks. I personally prefer nowadays git over svn even despite the
> fact that only Intellij and a handful of editors have decent git
> integration. Git is simply so much better in dealing with day to day
> versioning tasks that going back to plain svn is painful!
>
> Werner
ok... let me now bring it up on infrastructure-dev@apache.org.
-Matthias
>
>
>
--
Matthias Wessendorf
blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
Re: [source control] git and the ASF ...
Posted by Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org>.
On Sat, May 16, 2009 at 7:41 AM, Werner Punz <we...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Ah lovely saturday morning and a general technology discussion.
>
> Ok here is the deal, it is a very common practice to use git for local
> versioning and svn or cvs for hosting the code (I do that very often). There
> are downsides to this practice. First of all git-svn does not have
> external parsing. Git has a similar mechanism subprojects but there is no
> bridget between git and svn in this regard, you have to symlink for instance
> manually to match the externals.
>
> Secondly it is a speed issue as well. Git is a distributed filesystem which
> does most operations locally and delegates the server to a storage system
> only. Which means you have local branches and local commit histories (one of
> the reasons why I use it) but the downside is it mirrors literally all
> revisions into you local filesystem (which is not as bad as it sounds since
> it stores the revisions very efficiently, way more than svn does) which
> means the initial mirror of a bigger project takes a very long time. And
> there the apache infrastructure which by far
> is not our idea comes into the game, having a read only git mirror
> speeds up this process much more swiftly.
>
> As for Andrews argument, this is no bothering from our side, as it seems the
> infrastructure people have been working on this for almost a year now and
> now have a stable infrastructure and many projects have moved
> towards this read only mirror.
+1 exactly and I thought that when I provide some links
(git.apache.org, the wiki pages etc) it makes it clear
that this is not something that Werner and I are doing :-)
Anyway there is a looooooooooooooooooooong on-going
discussion regarding GIT; pros/cons all the FUD etc. is
discussed on the members list (private, only for members).
I recommended to make it more open (community@ for instance);
Let's see where we heading
Also, if you follow some of the "Apache blogs" you also see that some
folks *care* about GIT .... (not only the two of us)
-Matthias
>
> The also seem to think about providing the same fo Mercurial in the future.
>
> Werner
>
>
>
> Mike Kienenberger schrieb:
>>
>> I don't know much about git, but I know that other committers on
>> Apache Cayenne use git to commit to the Cayenne svn, so it's certainly
>> possible to do what Andrew suggests. From my limited git
>> understanding, that's the typical practice of using git -- as a
>> front-end to svn or cvs.
>>
>> On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 4:08 PM, Andrew Robinson
>> <an...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> I would say -1. Seems pointless to use another version control client
>>> that is not 100% compatible with SVN when the SVN command-line and UI
>>> clients works fine. What next, a mercurial read-only repository too?
>>> We have chosen to use subversion with MyFaces at Apache, I don't see
>>> any reason to support other clients just to appease some peoples
>>> technology fix. But this is just my opinion.
>>>
>>> Note that there are tools out there to do this type of support from
>>> the client, not the server. For example,
>>> http://www.selenic.com/mercurial/wiki/WorkingWithSubversion details
>>> how to use Mercurial as an SVN client and even be able to commit to
>>> SVN! In my opinion, if someone wants to use git, then they should find
>>> a similar tool for git and not burden the folks at Apache.
>>>
>>> -Andrew
>>>
>>> FYI:
>>>
>>> http://www.russellbeattie.com/blog/distributed-revision-control-systems-git-vs-mercurial-vs-svn
>>> http://texagon.blogspot.com/2008/02/use-mercurial-you-git.html
>>> http://weblog.masukomi.org/2008/02/07/a-rebuttal-to-use-mercurial-you-git
>>>
>>> On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 10:45 AM, Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org>
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> some more infos:
>>>>
>>>> http://wiki.apache.org/general/GitAtApache
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 11:39 AM, Matthias Wessendorf
>>>> <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 11:37 AM, Werner Punz <we...@gmail.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Matthias Wessendorf schrieb:
>>>>>> core
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Ok, I filed this:
>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-2053
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> maybe we should also think about making the JSF 1.1.x stuff a branch
>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>> (since we already work on 2.0.x....)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> +1
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 1.1.x branch
>>>>>> 1.2 trunk
>>>>>> 2.0 branch
>>>>>
>>>>> hehe :-) just wrote a similar email :-)
>>>>>
>>>>> -Matthias
>>>>>
>>>>>> instead of
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 1.1 trunk
>>>>>> 1.2 trunk_1.2
>>>>>> 2.0 branch
>>>>>>
>>>>>> this also helps the infrastructure people!
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Matthias Wessendorf
>>>>>
>>>>> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
>>>>> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
>>>>> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Matthias Wessendorf
>>>>
>>>> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
>>>> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
>>>> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
>>>>
>>
>
>
--
Matthias Wessendorf
blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
Re: [source control] git and the ASF ...
Posted by Werner Punz <we...@gmail.com>.
Ok before I make myself a complete idiot...
(Which I probably will be doing now)
There are a load of errata in my previous post, more than the usual
answering while doing other things and also being a completely chaotic
personality, induced errors.
I answered shortly after waking up and having a baby boy wanting
attention at the same time. So excuse all the errata I made in my last post.
Besides the usual typos, of course, Git is not a distributed filesystem
(although it comes close to being actually a versioning filesystem)
it is a distributed RCS (Or a complete moron if your are from the UK, it
depends on your location of physical presence).
So my excuses to everyone reading my last technobabble.
Werner
Werner Punz schrieb:
> Ah lovely saturday morning and a general technology discussion.
>
> Ok here is the deal, it is a very common practice to use git for local
> versioning and svn or cvs for hosting the code (I do that very often).
> There are downsides to this practice. First of all git-svn does not have
> external parsing. Git has a similar mechanism subprojects but there is
> no bridget between git and svn in this regard, you have to symlink for
> instance manually to match the externals.
>
> Secondly it is a speed issue as well. Git is a distributed filesystem
> which does most operations locally and delegates the server to a storage
> system only. Which means you have local branches and local commit
> histories (one of the reasons why I use it) but the downside is it
> mirrors literally all revisions into you local filesystem (which is not
> as bad as it sounds since it stores the revisions very efficiently, way
> more than svn does) which means the initial mirror of a bigger project
> takes a very long time. And there the apache infrastructure which by far
> is not our idea comes into the game, having a read only git mirror
> speeds up this process much more swiftly.
>
> As for Andrews argument, this is no bothering from our side, as it seems
> the infrastructure people have been working on this for almost a year
> now and now have a stable infrastructure and many projects have moved
> towards this read only mirror.
>
> The also seem to think about providing the same fo Mercurial in the future.
>
> Werner
>
>
>
> Mike Kienenberger schrieb:
>> I don't know much about git, but I know that other committers on
>> Apache Cayenne use git to commit to the Cayenne svn, so it's certainly
>> possible to do what Andrew suggests. From my limited git
>> understanding, that's the typical practice of using git -- as a
>> front-end to svn or cvs.
>>
>> On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 4:08 PM, Andrew Robinson
>> <an...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> I would say -1. Seems pointless to use another version control client
>>> that is not 100% compatible with SVN when the SVN command-line and UI
>>> clients works fine. What next, a mercurial read-only repository too?
>>> We have chosen to use subversion with MyFaces at Apache, I don't see
>>> any reason to support other clients just to appease some peoples
>>> technology fix. But this is just my opinion.
>>>
>>> Note that there are tools out there to do this type of support from
>>> the client, not the server. For example,
>>> http://www.selenic.com/mercurial/wiki/WorkingWithSubversion details
>>> how to use Mercurial as an SVN client and even be able to commit to
>>> SVN! In my opinion, if someone wants to use git, then they should find
>>> a similar tool for git and not burden the folks at Apache.
>>>
>>> -Andrew
>>>
>>> FYI:
>>> http://www.russellbeattie.com/blog/distributed-revision-control-systems-git-vs-mercurial-vs-svn
>>>
>>> http://texagon.blogspot.com/2008/02/use-mercurial-you-git.html
>>> http://weblog.masukomi.org/2008/02/07/a-rebuttal-to-use-mercurial-you-git
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 10:45 AM, Matthias Wessendorf
>>> <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>> some more infos:
>>>>
>>>> http://wiki.apache.org/general/GitAtApache
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 11:39 AM, Matthias Wessendorf
>>>> <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>> On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 11:37 AM, Werner Punz
>>>>> <we...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> Matthias Wessendorf schrieb:
>>>>>> core
>>>>>>> Ok, I filed this:
>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-2053
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> maybe we should also think about making the JSF 1.1.x stuff a
>>>>>>> branch ...
>>>>>>> (since we already work on 2.0.x....)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> +1
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 1.1.x branch
>>>>>> 1.2 trunk
>>>>>> 2.0 branch
>>>>> hehe :-) just wrote a similar email :-)
>>>>>
>>>>> -Matthias
>>>>>
>>>>>> instead of
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 1.1 trunk
>>>>>> 1.2 trunk_1.2
>>>>>> 2.0 branch
>>>>>>
>>>>>> this also helps the infrastructure people!
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Matthias Wessendorf
>>>>>
>>>>> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
>>>>> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
>>>>> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Matthias Wessendorf
>>>>
>>>> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
>>>> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
>>>> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
>>>>
>>
>
>
Re: [source control] git and the ASF ...
Posted by Werner Punz <we...@gmail.com>.
Ah lovely saturday morning and a general technology discussion.
Ok here is the deal, it is a very common practice to use git for local
versioning and svn or cvs for hosting the code (I do that very often).
There are downsides to this practice. First of all git-svn does not have
external parsing. Git has a similar mechanism subprojects but there is
no bridget between git and svn in this regard, you have to symlink for
instance manually to match the externals.
Secondly it is a speed issue as well. Git is a distributed filesystem
which does most operations locally and delegates the server to a storage
system only. Which means you have local branches and local commit
histories (one of the reasons why I use it) but the downside is it
mirrors literally all revisions into you local filesystem (which is not
as bad as it sounds since it stores the revisions very efficiently, way
more than svn does) which means the initial mirror of a bigger project
takes a very long time. And there the apache infrastructure which by far
is not our idea comes into the game, having a read only git mirror
speeds up this process much more swiftly.
As for Andrews argument, this is no bothering from our side, as it seems
the infrastructure people have been working on this for almost a year
now and now have a stable infrastructure and many projects have moved
towards this read only mirror.
The also seem to think about providing the same fo Mercurial in the future.
Werner
Mike Kienenberger schrieb:
> I don't know much about git, but I know that other committers on
> Apache Cayenne use git to commit to the Cayenne svn, so it's certainly
> possible to do what Andrew suggests. From my limited git
> understanding, that's the typical practice of using git -- as a
> front-end to svn or cvs.
>
> On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 4:08 PM, Andrew Robinson
> <an...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I would say -1. Seems pointless to use another version control client
>> that is not 100% compatible with SVN when the SVN command-line and UI
>> clients works fine. What next, a mercurial read-only repository too?
>> We have chosen to use subversion with MyFaces at Apache, I don't see
>> any reason to support other clients just to appease some peoples
>> technology fix. But this is just my opinion.
>>
>> Note that there are tools out there to do this type of support from
>> the client, not the server. For example,
>> http://www.selenic.com/mercurial/wiki/WorkingWithSubversion details
>> how to use Mercurial as an SVN client and even be able to commit to
>> SVN! In my opinion, if someone wants to use git, then they should find
>> a similar tool for git and not burden the folks at Apache.
>>
>> -Andrew
>>
>> FYI:
>> http://www.russellbeattie.com/blog/distributed-revision-control-systems-git-vs-mercurial-vs-svn
>> http://texagon.blogspot.com/2008/02/use-mercurial-you-git.html
>> http://weblog.masukomi.org/2008/02/07/a-rebuttal-to-use-mercurial-you-git
>>
>> On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 10:45 AM, Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
>>> some more infos:
>>>
>>> http://wiki.apache.org/general/GitAtApache
>>>
>>> On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 11:39 AM, Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>> On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 11:37 AM, Werner Punz <we...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> Matthias Wessendorf schrieb:
>>>>> core
>>>>>> Ok, I filed this:
>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-2053
>>>>>>
>>>>>> maybe we should also think about making the JSF 1.1.x stuff a branch ...
>>>>>> (since we already work on 2.0.x....)
>>>>>>
>>>>> +1
>>>>>
>>>>> 1.1.x branch
>>>>> 1.2 trunk
>>>>> 2.0 branch
>>>> hehe :-) just wrote a similar email :-)
>>>>
>>>> -Matthias
>>>>
>>>>> instead of
>>>>>
>>>>> 1.1 trunk
>>>>> 1.2 trunk_1.2
>>>>> 2.0 branch
>>>>>
>>>>> this also helps the infrastructure people!
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Matthias Wessendorf
>>>>
>>>> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
>>>> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
>>>> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Matthias Wessendorf
>>>
>>> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
>>> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
>>> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
>>>
>
Re: [source control] git and the ASF ...
Posted by Mike Kienenberger <mk...@gmail.com>.
I don't know much about git, but I know that other committers on
Apache Cayenne use git to commit to the Cayenne svn, so it's certainly
possible to do what Andrew suggests. From my limited git
understanding, that's the typical practice of using git -- as a
front-end to svn or cvs.
On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 4:08 PM, Andrew Robinson
<an...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I would say -1. Seems pointless to use another version control client
> that is not 100% compatible with SVN when the SVN command-line and UI
> clients works fine. What next, a mercurial read-only repository too?
> We have chosen to use subversion with MyFaces at Apache, I don't see
> any reason to support other clients just to appease some peoples
> technology fix. But this is just my opinion.
>
> Note that there are tools out there to do this type of support from
> the client, not the server. For example,
> http://www.selenic.com/mercurial/wiki/WorkingWithSubversion details
> how to use Mercurial as an SVN client and even be able to commit to
> SVN! In my opinion, if someone wants to use git, then they should find
> a similar tool for git and not burden the folks at Apache.
>
> -Andrew
>
> FYI:
> http://www.russellbeattie.com/blog/distributed-revision-control-systems-git-vs-mercurial-vs-svn
> http://texagon.blogspot.com/2008/02/use-mercurial-you-git.html
> http://weblog.masukomi.org/2008/02/07/a-rebuttal-to-use-mercurial-you-git
>
> On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 10:45 AM, Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
>> some more infos:
>>
>> http://wiki.apache.org/general/GitAtApache
>>
>> On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 11:39 AM, Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
>>> On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 11:37 AM, Werner Punz <we...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Matthias Wessendorf schrieb:
>>>> core
>>>>>
>>>>> Ok, I filed this:
>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-2053
>>>>>
>>>>> maybe we should also think about making the JSF 1.1.x stuff a branch ...
>>>>> (since we already work on 2.0.x....)
>>>>>
>>>> +1
>>>>
>>>> 1.1.x branch
>>>> 1.2 trunk
>>>> 2.0 branch
>>>
>>> hehe :-) just wrote a similar email :-)
>>>
>>> -Matthias
>>>
>>>>
>>>> instead of
>>>>
>>>> 1.1 trunk
>>>> 1.2 trunk_1.2
>>>> 2.0 branch
>>>>
>>>> this also helps the infrastructure people!
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Matthias Wessendorf
>>>
>>> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
>>> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
>>> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Matthias Wessendorf
>>
>> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
>> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
>> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
>>
>
Re: [source control] git and the ASF ...
Posted by Matthias Wessendorf <mw...@gmail.com>.
Anderw, I asked to move the thread to committers@.
Thx
Matthias
Sent from my iPod.
On 15.05.2009, at 22:21, Matthias Wessendorf <mw...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> Hey andrew,
>
> Thanks for your mail. There is a discussion on the members list. Let
> me point them to our thread.
>
> Thanks again!
>
> Sent from my iPod.
>
> On 15.05.2009, at 22:08, Andrew Robinson
> <an...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I would say -1. Seems pointless to use another version control client
>> that is not 100% compatible with SVN when the SVN command-line and UI
>> clients works fine. What next, a mercurial read-only repository too?
>> We have chosen to use subversion with MyFaces at Apache, I don't see
>> any reason to support other clients just to appease some peoples
>> technology fix. But this is just my opinion.
>>
>> Note that there are tools out there to do this type of support from
>> the client, not the server. For example,
>> http://www.selenic.com/mercurial/wiki/WorkingWithSubversion details
>> how to use Mercurial as an SVN client and even be able to commit to
>> SVN! In my opinion, if someone wants to use git, then they should
>> find
>> a similar tool for git and not burden the folks at Apache.
>>
>> -Andrew
>>
>> FYI:
>> http://www.russellbeattie.com/blog/distributed-revision-control-systems-git-vs-mercurial-vs-svn
>> http://texagon.blogspot.com/2008/02/use-mercurial-you-git.html
>> http://weblog.masukomi.org/2008/02/07/a-rebuttal-to-use-mercurial-you-git
>>
>> On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 10:45 AM, Matthias Wessendorf <matzew@apache.org
>> > wrote:
>>> some more infos:
>>>
>>> http://wiki.apache.org/general/GitAtApache
>>>
>>> On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 11:39 AM, Matthias Wessendorf <matzew@apache.org
>>> > wrote:
>>>> On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 11:37 AM, Werner Punz <werner.punz@gmail.com
>>>> > wrote:
>>>>> Matthias Wessendorf schrieb:
>>>>> core
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Ok, I filed this:
>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-2053
>>>>>>
>>>>>> maybe we should also think about making the JSF 1.1.x stuff a
>>>>>> branch ...
>>>>>> (since we already work on 2.0.x....)
>>>>>>
>>>>> +1
>>>>>
>>>>> 1.1.x branch
>>>>> 1.2 trunk
>>>>> 2.0 branch
>>>>
>>>> hehe :-) just wrote a similar email :-)
>>>>
>>>> -Matthias
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> instead of
>>>>>
>>>>> 1.1 trunk
>>>>> 1.2 trunk_1.2
>>>>> 2.0 branch
>>>>>
>>>>> this also helps the infrastructure people!
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Matthias Wessendorf
>>>>
>>>> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
>>>> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
>>>> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Matthias Wessendorf
>>>
>>> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
>>> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
>>> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
>>>
Re: [source control] git and the ASF ...
Posted by Matthias Wessendorf <mw...@gmail.com>.
Hey andrew,
Thanks for your mail. There is a discussion on the members list. Let
me point them to our thread.
Thanks again!
Sent from my iPod.
On 15.05.2009, at 22:08, Andrew Robinson
<an...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I would say -1. Seems pointless to use another version control client
> that is not 100% compatible with SVN when the SVN command-line and UI
> clients works fine. What next, a mercurial read-only repository too?
> We have chosen to use subversion with MyFaces at Apache, I don't see
> any reason to support other clients just to appease some peoples
> technology fix. But this is just my opinion.
>
> Note that there are tools out there to do this type of support from
> the client, not the server. For example,
> http://www.selenic.com/mercurial/wiki/WorkingWithSubversion details
> how to use Mercurial as an SVN client and even be able to commit to
> SVN! In my opinion, if someone wants to use git, then they should find
> a similar tool for git and not burden the folks at Apache.
>
> -Andrew
>
> FYI:
> http://www.russellbeattie.com/blog/distributed-revision-control-systems-git-vs-mercurial-vs-svn
> http://texagon.blogspot.com/2008/02/use-mercurial-you-git.html
> http://weblog.masukomi.org/2008/02/07/a-rebuttal-to-use-mercurial-you-git
>
> On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 10:45 AM, Matthias Wessendorf <matzew@apache.org
> > wrote:
>> some more infos:
>>
>> http://wiki.apache.org/general/GitAtApache
>>
>> On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 11:39 AM, Matthias Wessendorf <matzew@apache.org
>> > wrote:
>>> On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 11:37 AM, Werner Punz
>>> <we...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Matthias Wessendorf schrieb:
>>>> core
>>>>>
>>>>> Ok, I filed this:
>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-2053
>>>>>
>>>>> maybe we should also think about making the JSF 1.1.x stuff a
>>>>> branch ...
>>>>> (since we already work on 2.0.x....)
>>>>>
>>>> +1
>>>>
>>>> 1.1.x branch
>>>> 1.2 trunk
>>>> 2.0 branch
>>>
>>> hehe :-) just wrote a similar email :-)
>>>
>>> -Matthias
>>>
>>>>
>>>> instead of
>>>>
>>>> 1.1 trunk
>>>> 1.2 trunk_1.2
>>>> 2.0 branch
>>>>
>>>> this also helps the infrastructure people!
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Matthias Wessendorf
>>>
>>> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
>>> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
>>> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Matthias Wessendorf
>>
>> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
>> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
>> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
>>
Re: [source control] git and the ASF ...
Posted by Andrew Robinson <an...@gmail.com>.
I would say -1. Seems pointless to use another version control client
that is not 100% compatible with SVN when the SVN command-line and UI
clients works fine. What next, a mercurial read-only repository too?
We have chosen to use subversion with MyFaces at Apache, I don't see
any reason to support other clients just to appease some peoples
technology fix. But this is just my opinion.
Note that there are tools out there to do this type of support from
the client, not the server. For example,
http://www.selenic.com/mercurial/wiki/WorkingWithSubversion details
how to use Mercurial as an SVN client and even be able to commit to
SVN! In my opinion, if someone wants to use git, then they should find
a similar tool for git and not burden the folks at Apache.
-Andrew
FYI:
http://www.russellbeattie.com/blog/distributed-revision-control-systems-git-vs-mercurial-vs-svn
http://texagon.blogspot.com/2008/02/use-mercurial-you-git.html
http://weblog.masukomi.org/2008/02/07/a-rebuttal-to-use-mercurial-you-git
On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 10:45 AM, Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
> some more infos:
>
> http://wiki.apache.org/general/GitAtApache
>
> On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 11:39 AM, Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
>> On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 11:37 AM, Werner Punz <we...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Matthias Wessendorf schrieb:
>>> core
>>>>
>>>> Ok, I filed this:
>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-2053
>>>>
>>>> maybe we should also think about making the JSF 1.1.x stuff a branch ...
>>>> (since we already work on 2.0.x....)
>>>>
>>> +1
>>>
>>> 1.1.x branch
>>> 1.2 trunk
>>> 2.0 branch
>>
>> hehe :-) just wrote a similar email :-)
>>
>> -Matthias
>>
>>>
>>> instead of
>>>
>>> 1.1 trunk
>>> 1.2 trunk_1.2
>>> 2.0 branch
>>>
>>> this also helps the infrastructure people!
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Matthias Wessendorf
>>
>> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
>> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
>> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Matthias Wessendorf
>
> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
>
Re: [source control] git and the ASF ...
Posted by Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org>.
some more infos:
http://wiki.apache.org/general/GitAtApache
On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 11:39 AM, Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
> On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 11:37 AM, Werner Punz <we...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Matthias Wessendorf schrieb:
>> core
>>>
>>> Ok, I filed this:
>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-2053
>>>
>>> maybe we should also think about making the JSF 1.1.x stuff a branch ...
>>> (since we already work on 2.0.x....)
>>>
>> +1
>>
>> 1.1.x branch
>> 1.2 trunk
>> 2.0 branch
>
> hehe :-) just wrote a similar email :-)
>
> -Matthias
>
>>
>> instead of
>>
>> 1.1 trunk
>> 1.2 trunk_1.2
>> 2.0 branch
>>
>> this also helps the infrastructure people!
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Matthias Wessendorf
>
> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
>
--
Matthias Wessendorf
blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
Re: [source control] git and the ASF ...
Posted by Bernd Bohmann <be...@atanion.com>.
Hello,
I would suggest following layout
1.1.x branch/1.1.x
1.2.x branch/1.2.x
2.0.x trunk
because the 2.0.x version is in development the other branches are
only in bugfix state.
Regards
Bernd
On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 11:39 AM, Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
> On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 11:37 AM, Werner Punz <we...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Matthias Wessendorf schrieb:
>> core
>>>
>>> Ok, I filed this:
>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-2053
>>>
>>> maybe we should also think about making the JSF 1.1.x stuff a branch ...
>>> (since we already work on 2.0.x....)
>>>
>> +1
>>
>> 1.1.x branch
>> 1.2 trunk
>> 2.0 branch
>
> hehe :-) just wrote a similar email :-)
>
> -Matthias
>
>>
>> instead of
>>
>> 1.1 trunk
>> 1.2 trunk_1.2
>> 2.0 branch
>>
>> this also helps the infrastructure people!
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Matthias Wessendorf
>
> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
>
Re: [source control] git and the ASF ...
Posted by Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org>.
On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 11:37 AM, Werner Punz <we...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Matthias Wessendorf schrieb:
> core
>>
>> Ok, I filed this:
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-2053
>>
>> maybe we should also think about making the JSF 1.1.x stuff a branch ...
>> (since we already work on 2.0.x....)
>>
> +1
>
> 1.1.x branch
> 1.2 trunk
> 2.0 branch
hehe :-) just wrote a similar email :-)
-Matthias
>
> instead of
>
> 1.1 trunk
> 1.2 trunk_1.2
> 2.0 branch
>
> this also helps the infrastructure people!
>
>
>
>
>
--
Matthias Wessendorf
blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
Re: [source control] git and the ASF ...
Posted by Werner Punz <we...@gmail.com>.
Matthias Wessendorf schrieb:
core
>
> Ok, I filed this:
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-2053
>
> maybe we should also think about making the JSF 1.1.x stuff a branch ...
> (since we already work on 2.0.x....)
>
+1
1.1.x branch
1.2 trunk
2.0 branch
instead of
1.1 trunk
1.2 trunk_1.2
2.0 branch
this also helps the infrastructure people!
Re: [source control] git and the ASF ...
Posted by Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org>.
On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 11:11 AM, Werner Punz <we...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Matthias Wessendorf schrieb:
>>
>> Werner,
>>
>> according to here:
>> http://www.apache.org/dev/git.html
>>
>> we need to provide the following information, for the INFRA jira ticket:
>> * Name of the codebase, for example "Apache Tika"
>> * Name of the requested Git mirror, for example "tika.git"
>> * Subversion path of the codebase, for example "/lucene/tika/"
>> * Subversion layout, in case it is different from the standard
>> "trunk, branches, tags" structure.
>>
>> I think we may start with MyFaces core? Or do you think we should add
>> *all* the subprojects?
>>
> +1 to core
Ok, I filed this:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-2053
maybe we should also think about making the JSF 1.1.x stuff a branch ...
(since we already work on 2.0.x....)
-Matthias
>
> I think core is find for now and later we can add tomahawk and
> orchestra etc... have in mind that git basically mirrors all revisions and
> you cannot checkout subprojects like in svn, so having a split is
> preferrable.
>
> Werner
>
>
--
Matthias Wessendorf
blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
Re: [source control] git and the ASF ...
Posted by Werner Punz <we...@gmail.com>.
Matthias Wessendorf schrieb:
> Werner,
>
> according to here:
> http://www.apache.org/dev/git.html
>
> we need to provide the following information, for the INFRA jira ticket:
> * Name of the codebase, for example "Apache Tika"
> * Name of the requested Git mirror, for example "tika.git"
> * Subversion path of the codebase, for example "/lucene/tika/"
> * Subversion layout, in case it is different from the standard
> "trunk, branches, tags" structure.
>
> I think we may start with MyFaces core? Or do you think we should add
> *all* the subprojects?
>
+1 to core
I think core is find for now and later we can add tomahawk and
orchestra etc... have in mind that git basically mirrors all revisions
and you cannot checkout subprojects like in svn, so having a split is
preferrable.
Werner
Re: [source control] git and the ASF ...
Posted by Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org>.
Werner,
according to here:
http://www.apache.org/dev/git.html
we need to provide the following information, for the INFRA jira ticket:
* Name of the codebase, for example "Apache Tika"
* Name of the requested Git mirror, for example "tika.git"
* Subversion path of the codebase, for example "/lucene/tika/"
* Subversion layout, in case it is different from the standard
"trunk, branches, tags" structure.
I think we may start with MyFaces core? Or do you think we should add
*all* the subprojects?
For MyFaces CORE, I'd suggest the following:
Name of the codebase: Apache MyFaces
Name of the requested Git mirror: myfaces_core.git
Subversion path of the codebase: /myfaces/core/
-Matthias
On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 8:56 AM, Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 12:14 PM, Werner Punz <we...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Matthias Wessendorf schrieb:
>>>
>>> Hi fellow contributors and committers,
>>>
>>> a recently common asked question is:
>>> "Is it possible for an ASF project (-> myfaces and its subprojects) to
>>> use git ?"
>>>
>>> The answer is:
>>> Yes and no. All projects need to use svn as the central store of all
>>> source code, but individual committers and contributors can use git as
>>> an "alternative svn client". See http://git.apache.org/ and
>>> http://wiki.apache.org/general/GitAtApache for the currently available
>>> tools and some initial documentation.
>>>
>>> So, question is now, do we (Apache MyFaces) want such a read-only git
>>> mirror ?
>>>
>>> If yes, I'd be more than happy to run this on the
>>> "infrastructure-dev@apache.org" list.
>>>
>> Just to give a short summary why a read only mirror is preferrable over
>> a full git-svn checkout.
>> The git mirror would allow git deltas to be downloaded instead of single
>> svn commits, which would make the initial checkout (git mirror) way faster!
>>
>> As for svn externals, git-svn cannot deal with externals directly
>> but there are workarounds like using git subprojects or
>> using symlinks. I personally prefer nowadays git over svn even despite the
>> fact that only Intellij and a handful of editors have decent git
>> integration. Git is simply so much better in dealing with day to day
>> versioning tasks that going back to plain svn is painful!
>>
>> Werner
>
> ok... let me now bring it up on infrastructure-dev@apache.org.
>
> -Matthias
>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Matthias Wessendorf
>
> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
>
--
Matthias Wessendorf
blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf