You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to derby-dev@db.apache.org by Alex O'Ree <al...@apache.org> on 2018/12/17 00:16:28 UTC
switch to git?
Has anyone suggested switching to git? ASF makes the change pretty painless
Re: switch to git?
Posted by Bryan Pendleton <bp...@gmail.com>.
I thought we already had a git mirror for the svn repo for Derby.
I thought Knut Anders already used it quite successfully for his contributions.
Perhaps he will respond to this email with more details?
If not, I can probably search the archives.
bryan
On Mon, Dec 17, 2018 at 4:20 PM Alex O'Ree <al...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> I wasn't at first either. It seems unnecessary at a glance. It does greatly simplify accepting contributions from users without commit rights. For outside committers, they can commit as much as they need to without affecting the baseline. Which makes things much easier for larger tasks. Pull requests and code reviews are much simpler than reviewing a patch file. In general, merging branches is less painful. Just my 2 cents. History is maintained with the conversion, in case that's a concern.
>
> So as someone that wants to contribute to this project, I'm asking the question because it would make my life easier.
>
> On Mon, Dec 17, 2018 at 11:05 AM Rick Hillegas <ri...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> On 12/16/18 4:16 PM, Alex O'Ree wrote:
>> > Has anyone suggested switching to git? ASF makes the change pretty
>> > painless
>>
>> I'm not a git enthusiast.
>>
Re: switch to git?
Posted by Bryan Pendleton <bp...@gmail.com>.
Not sure about the pull request part, but here's a place to start:
https://github.com/apache/derby
bryan
On Mon, Dec 17, 2018 at 6:21 PM Alex O'Ree <al...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> Which merge tool is good in your opinion? I've used the tortoise products with good results
>
> Also, if mirroring to github is enabled for this project and you can accept PRs from it, then this is a moot conversation.
>
> On Mon, Dec 17, 2018 at 8:34 PM Rick Hillegas <ri...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> I appreciate your willingness to contribute. Nevertheless, I think that
>>
>> * git is a poor fit for Derby's culture of incremental development and is, instead, better suited to large projects where teams work in isolation from one another on large contributions
>>
>> * git has the worst merge tool I have ever used
>>
>> * git is extremely confusing for developers coming from a subversion mind set (like myself)
>>
>> * everyone I know who uses git has ended up shooting themselves in the foot
>>
>> Here is how I rank (in descending order) the repository management tools I have used:
>>
>> * subversion (simple model, good merge tool)
>> * mercurial (complex model but good merge tool)
>> * perforce (lousy merge tool)
>> * clearcase (overarchitected)
>> * git (overarchitected, lousy merge tool)
>>
>> My $0.02,
>> -Rick
>>
>> On 12/17/18 4:20 PM, Alex O'Ree wrote:
>>
>> I wasn't at first either. It seems unnecessary at a glance. It does greatly simplify accepting contributions from users without commit rights. For outside committers, they can commit as much as they need to without affecting the baseline. Which makes things much easier for larger tasks. Pull requests and code reviews are much simpler than reviewing a patch file. In general, merging branches is less painful. Just my 2 cents. History is maintained with the conversion, in case that's a concern.
>>
>> So as someone that wants to contribute to this project, I'm asking the question because it would make my life easier.
>>
>> On Mon, Dec 17, 2018 at 11:05 AM Rick Hillegas <ri...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 12/16/18 4:16 PM, Alex O'Ree wrote:
>>> > Has anyone suggested switching to git? ASF makes the change pretty
>>> > painless
>>>
>>> I'm not a git enthusiast.
>>>
>>
Re: switch to git?
Posted by Alex O'Ree <al...@apache.org>.
Which merge tool is good in your opinion? I've used the tortoise products
with good results
Also, if mirroring to github is enabled for this project and you can accept
PRs from it, then this is a moot conversation.
On Mon, Dec 17, 2018 at 8:34 PM Rick Hillegas <ri...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> I appreciate your willingness to contribute. Nevertheless, I think that
>
> * git is a poor fit for Derby's culture of incremental development and is,
> instead, better suited to large projects where teams work in isolation from
> one another on large contributions
>
> * git has the worst merge tool I have ever used
>
> * git is extremely confusing for developers coming from a subversion mind
> set (like myself)
>
> * everyone I know who uses git has ended up shooting themselves in the foot
>
> Here is how I rank (in descending order) the repository management tools I
> have used:
>
> * subversion (simple model, good merge tool)
> * mercurial (complex model but good merge tool)
> * perforce (lousy merge tool)
> * clearcase (overarchitected)
> * git (overarchitected, lousy merge tool)
>
> My $0.02,
> -Rick
>
> On 12/17/18 4:20 PM, Alex O'Ree wrote:
>
> I wasn't at first either. It seems unnecessary at a glance. It does
> greatly simplify accepting contributions from users without commit rights.
> For outside committers, they can commit as much as they need to without
> affecting the baseline. Which makes things much easier for larger tasks.
> Pull requests and code reviews are much simpler than reviewing a patch
> file. In general, merging branches is less painful. Just my 2 cents.
> History is maintained with the conversion, in case that's a concern.
>
> So as someone that wants to contribute to this project, I'm asking the
> question because it would make my life easier.
>
> On Mon, Dec 17, 2018 at 11:05 AM Rick Hillegas <ri...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> On 12/16/18 4:16 PM, Alex O'Ree wrote:
>> > Has anyone suggested switching to git? ASF makes the change pretty
>> > painless
>>
>> I'm not a git enthusiast.
>>
>>
>
Re: switch to git?
Posted by Rick Hillegas <ri...@gmail.com>.
I appreciate your willingness to contribute. Nevertheless, I think that
* git is a poor fit for Derby's culture of incremental development and
is, instead, better suited to large projects where teams work in
isolation from one another on large contributions
* git has the worst merge tool I have ever used
* git is extremely confusing for developers coming from a subversion
mind set (like myself)
* everyone I know who uses git has ended up shooting themselves in the foot
Here is how I rank (in descending order) the repository management tools
I have used:
* subversion (simple model, good merge tool)
* mercurial (complex model but good merge tool)
* perforce (lousy merge tool)
* clearcase (overarchitected)
* git (overarchitected, lousy merge tool)
My $0.02,
-Rick
On 12/17/18 4:20 PM, Alex O'Ree wrote:
> I wasn't at first either. It seems unnecessary at a glance. It does
> greatly simplify accepting contributions from users without commit
> rights. For outside committers, they can commit as much as they need
> to without affecting the baseline. Which makes things much easier for
> larger tasks. Pull requests and code reviews are much simpler than
> reviewing a patch file. In general, merging branches is less painful.
> Just my 2 cents. History is maintained with the conversion, in case
> that's a concern.
>
> So as someone that wants to contribute to this project, I'm asking the
> question because it would make my life easier.
>
> On Mon, Dec 17, 2018 at 11:05 AM Rick Hillegas
> <rick.hillegas@gmail.com <ma...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> On 12/16/18 4:16 PM, Alex O'Ree wrote:
> > Has anyone suggested switching to git? ASF makes the change pretty
> > painless
>
> I'm not a git enthusiast.
>
Re: switch to git?
Posted by Alex O'Ree <al...@apache.org>.
I wasn't at first either. It seems unnecessary at a glance. It does greatly
simplify accepting contributions from users without commit rights. For
outside committers, they can commit as much as they need to without
affecting the baseline. Which makes things much easier for larger tasks.
Pull requests and code reviews are much simpler than reviewing a patch
file. In general, merging branches is less painful. Just my 2 cents.
History is maintained with the conversion, in case that's a concern.
So as someone that wants to contribute to this project, I'm asking the
question because it would make my life easier.
On Mon, Dec 17, 2018 at 11:05 AM Rick Hillegas <ri...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> On 12/16/18 4:16 PM, Alex O'Ree wrote:
> > Has anyone suggested switching to git? ASF makes the change pretty
> > painless
>
> I'm not a git enthusiast.
>
>
Re: switch to git?
Posted by Rick Hillegas <ri...@gmail.com>.
On 12/16/18 4:16 PM, Alex O'Ree wrote:
> Has anyone suggested switching to git? ASF makes the change pretty
> painless
I'm not a git enthusiast.