You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to general@incubator.apache.org by Christian Lippka <cl...@lippka.com> on 2011/06/02 22:26:10 UTC
OpenOffice - Wiki - Required Resources - Subversion vs. Mercurial
vs. Git
Hello,
The Open Office Proposal Wiki currently lists a subversion repository as
a required resource.
We already had subversion for some time as the repository for the main
code and it didn't
work well for a project this size. I do not like to start a religious
ware so from my point of
view both git or mercurial should be fine and preferred over subversion.
Regards,
Christian Lippka
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: OpenOffice - Wiki - Required Resources - Subversion vs. Mercurial vs. Git
Posted by eric b <er...@free.fr>.
Le 2 juin 11 à 22:26, Christian Lippka a écrit :
> Hello,
>
Hello Christian,
> The Open Office Proposal Wiki currently lists a subversion
> repository as a required resource.
>
> We already had subversion for some time as the repository for the
> main code and it didn't work well for a project this size. I do not
> like to start a religious ware so from my point of
> view both git or mercurial should be fine and preferred over
> subversion.
>
Good catch.
I can confirm the same using subversion for OOo4Kids repository (base
on OOO320_m19) : it is scheduled to migrate to git soon (and create
OOoLight repo at the same occasion).
And to avoid religion war, I remember one very interesting discussion
on dev@openoffice.org list. Could be usefull to read the thread as
starting point ? (I need to retrieve the entre though ..)
Regards,
Eric Bachard
--
qɔᴉɹə
Education Project:
http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Education_Project
Projet OOo4Kids : http://wiki.ooo4kids.org/index.php/Main_Page
L'association EducOOo : http://www.educoo.org
Blog : http://eric.bachard.org/news
Re: OpenOffice - Wiki - Required Resources - Subversion vs. Mercurial
vs. Git
Posted by Greg Stein <gs...@gmail.com>.
On Thu, Jun 2, 2011 at 16:26, Christian Lippka <cl...@lippka.com> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> The Open Office Proposal Wiki currently lists a subversion repository as a
> required resource.
>
> We already had subversion for some time as the repository for the main code
> and it didn't
> work well for a project this size. I do not like to start a religious ware
> so from my point of
> view both git or mercurial should be fine and preferred over subversion.
Right now, the ASF only provides a read/write Subversion repository,
and a read-only Git mirror. There are people working on figuring out a
way to bring Git to the ASF (given some of our various requirements),
but that isn't on the near horizon.
Cheers,
-g
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: OpenOffice - Wiki - Required Resources - Subversion vs. Mercurial
vs. Git
Posted by Ross Gardler <rg...@apache.org>.
On 02/06/2011 21:26, Christian Lippka wrote:
> Hello,
>
> The Open Office Proposal Wiki currently lists a subversion repository as
> a required resource.
>
> We already had subversion for some time as the repository for the main
> code and it didn't
> work well for a project this size. I do not like to start a religious
> ware so from my point of
> view both git or mercurial should be fine and preferred over subversion.
The ASF does not currently provide alternative version control systems.
It's Subversion only.
There are Git mirrors available upon request.
This may, or may not, change at some point in the future.
Ross
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: OpenOffice - Wiki - Required Resources - Subversion vs. Mercurial
vs. Git
Posted by Robert Burrell Donkin <ro...@gmail.com>.
On Sun, Jun 5, 2011 at 6:11 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton
<de...@acm.org> wrote:
> I say that the sooner one can move to uni-directional flows with the bi-directionals out in customization and adoption layers, if anywhere, the better. It is difficult to conceive of any other way to get on top of the refactoring that is surely required as part of making a manageable, layered component structure.
+1
> Yes, I know this is simplistic in the face of the reality of OpenOffice.org. I maintain that such a separation of concerns should be sought. That to some degree the problem of multi-platform distribution, localization, etc., has already been taken on by at least one "another" provides some important breathing room.
+1
Encouraging rich and diverse downstream ecology is essential. This
means allowing space for downstream entities step into the supply
chain.
Robert
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
RE: OpenOffice - Wiki - Required Resources - Subversion vs. Mercurial vs. Git
Posted by "Dennis E. Hamilton" <de...@acm.org>.
I say that the sooner one can move to uni-directional flows with the bi-directionals out in customization and adoption layers, if anywhere, the better. It is difficult to conceive of any other way to get on top of the refactoring that is surely required as part of making a manageable, layered component structure.
Yes, I know this is simplistic in the face of the reality of OpenOffice.org. I maintain that such a separation of concerns should be sought. That to some degree the problem of multi-platform distribution, localization, etc., has already been taken on by at least one "another" provides some important breathing room.
- Dennis
-----Original Message-----
From: Robert Burrell Donkin [mailto:robertburrelldonkin@gmail.com]
<http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-general/201106.mbox/%3cBANLkTi=Of5efCECyTN5_ePftAZR7V3DeSw@mail.gmail.com%3e>
Sent: Sunday, June 05, 2011 00:49
To: general@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: OpenOffice - Wiki - Required Resources - Subversion vs. Mercurial vs. Git
[ ... ]
Apache uses a canonical pattern best suited to uni-directional flows.
This tends to force finely grained component based designs, and clearer distinction between up and downstream code bases. So, again, we probably need to think about how to maintain continuity and about allowing a transitional period...
Robert
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: OpenOffice - Wiki - Required Resources - Subversion vs. Mercurial
vs. Git
Posted by Robert Burrell Donkin <ro...@gmail.com>.
On Fri, Jun 3, 2011 at 8:20 PM, Simon Phipps <si...@webmink.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 2, 2011 at 10:44 PM, Greg Stein <gs...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Thu, Jun 2, 2011 at 16:40, Noel J. Bergman <no...@devtech.com> wrote:
>> >> We already had subversion for some time as the repository for the main
>> >> code and it didn't work well for a project this size.
>> >
>> > Tangential to the responses you've already received, I'm curious as to
>> the
>> > problems you experienced with Subversion. Our infrastructure team,
>> working
>> > closely over the years with the Subversion team, has done wonders to get
>> > Subversion working for the ASF. We've often been their canary in the
>> coal
>> > mine. :-)
>>
>> Right. I know that the Apache Subversion team would love to hear about
>> any problems.
>>
>> As Noel mentions, the ASF repository is quite huge. We're over 1.1
>> million revisions, containing a couple hundred projects and millions
>> and millions of lines of code. We've got international replication,
>> backups, security, awesome admins, and a development team to keep it
>> all running smoothly.
>>
>> I can understand people desiring the Git style of workflow, but that
>> is different from a problem inherent to Subversion itself. So... if
>> you guys *did* have issues with the tool, then we'd really like to
>> know!
>>
>> "I can fix it... my dad's got an awesome set of tools..."
>>
>
>
> Just to drag the point here from the other thread where it was made, the
> problem is less the size of the code (although it is enormous and will make
> a great stress test for the SVN team :-) ) and more the need for frequent
> bi-directional merges between the different platforms where OOo is
> semi-independently implemented. The nature of the project makes a DVCS much
> more suitable which is why we switched to Mercurial and not Subversion
> originally - Subversion was very popular for other projects at Sun.
(I've often seen version control systems take the blame when the
problem arises from code flow. So, I suspected this might be the
case.)
Subversion is a good match for canonical pattern use cases.
Apache uses a canonical pattern best suited to uni-directional flows.
This tends to force finely grained component based designs, and
clearer distinction between up and downstream code bases. So, again,
we probably need to think about how to maintain continuity and about
allowing a transitional period...
Robert
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: OpenOffice - Wiki - Required Resources - Subversion vs. Mercurial
vs. Git
Posted by Greg Stein <gs...@gmail.com>.
On Fri, Jun 3, 2011 at 15:20, Simon Phipps <si...@webmink.com> wrote:
>...
> Just to drag the point here from the other thread where it was made, the
> problem is less the size of the code (although it is enormous and will make
> a great stress test for the SVN team :-) ) and more the need for frequent
Nah. OOo won't stress svn. We've seen MUCH larger repositories and
working copy checkouts. That's why I was interested in learning more
about the specific problems from the OOo team since it is well "within
bounds" of Subversion's capabilities.
It sounds more like workflow than a specific tool issue, though. It
may have also been caused by earlier releases of Subversion (1.0 thru
1.4) which did not have merge tracking features.
Cheers,
-g
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: OpenOffice - Wiki - Required Resources - Subversion vs. Mercurial
vs. Git
Posted by Simon Phipps <si...@webmink.com>.
On Thu, Jun 2, 2011 at 10:44 PM, Greg Stein <gs...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 2, 2011 at 16:40, Noel J. Bergman <no...@devtech.com> wrote:
> >> We already had subversion for some time as the repository for the main
> >> code and it didn't work well for a project this size.
> >
> > Tangential to the responses you've already received, I'm curious as to
> the
> > problems you experienced with Subversion. Our infrastructure team,
> working
> > closely over the years with the Subversion team, has done wonders to get
> > Subversion working for the ASF. We've often been their canary in the
> coal
> > mine. :-)
>
> Right. I know that the Apache Subversion team would love to hear about
> any problems.
>
> As Noel mentions, the ASF repository is quite huge. We're over 1.1
> million revisions, containing a couple hundred projects and millions
> and millions of lines of code. We've got international replication,
> backups, security, awesome admins, and a development team to keep it
> all running smoothly.
>
> I can understand people desiring the Git style of workflow, but that
> is different from a problem inherent to Subversion itself. So... if
> you guys *did* have issues with the tool, then we'd really like to
> know!
>
> "I can fix it... my dad's got an awesome set of tools..."
>
Just to drag the point here from the other thread where it was made, the
problem is less the size of the code (although it is enormous and will make
a great stress test for the SVN team :-) ) and more the need for frequent
bi-directional merges between the different platforms where OOo is
semi-independently implemented. The nature of the project makes a DVCS much
more suitable which is why we switched to Mercurial and not Subversion
originally - Subversion was very popular for other projects at Sun.
S.
Re: OpenOffice - Wiki - Required Resources - Subversion vs. Mercurial
vs. Git
Posted by Greg Stein <gs...@gmail.com>.
On Thu, Jun 2, 2011 at 16:40, Noel J. Bergman <no...@devtech.com> wrote:
>> We already had subversion for some time as the repository for the main
>> code and it didn't work well for a project this size.
>
> Tangential to the responses you've already received, I'm curious as to the
> problems you experienced with Subversion. Our infrastructure team, working
> closely over the years with the Subversion team, has done wonders to get
> Subversion working for the ASF. We've often been their canary in the coal
> mine. :-)
Right. I know that the Apache Subversion team would love to hear about
any problems.
As Noel mentions, the ASF repository is quite huge. We're over 1.1
million revisions, containing a couple hundred projects and millions
and millions of lines of code. We've got international replication,
backups, security, awesome admins, and a development team to keep it
all running smoothly.
I can understand people desiring the Git style of workflow, but that
is different from a problem inherent to Subversion itself. So... if
you guys *did* have issues with the tool, then we'd really like to
know!
"I can fix it... my dad's got an awesome set of tools..."
Cheers,
-g
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: OpenOffice - Wiki - Required Resources - Subversion vs. Mercurial
vs. Git
Posted by Christian Lippka <ch...@lippka.com>.
Am 02.06.2011 22:40, schrieb Noel J. Bergman:
>> We already had subversion for some time as the repository for the main
>> code and it didn't work well for a project this size.
> Tangential to the responses you've already received, I'm curious as to the
> problems you experienced with Subversion. Our infrastructure team, working
> closely over the years with the Subversion team, has done wonders to get
> Subversion working for the ASF. We've often been their canary in the coal
> mine. :-)
I'm afraid that having the luxury of full time release engineers at
StarOffice/Sun/Oracle kept me away from the
gory details. I just heard them complaining often. As a developer I
noticed unacceptable
delays when committing changes. The core of this issue may be the
childworkspace handling we had at OOo.
More precisely the re-sync process where you had to do frequently to
merge changes from the master in
your childworkspace branch. The main complain from release engineering
was the integration of said
childworkspace branches into the master took way to much time. Overall
the performance compared
to CVS we used before was worse.
I agree that svn may not be a problem if you have a series of small
patches. But usually on OOo with
medium to large features a lot of files needs to be changed and it often
takes some time until it is
mature enough to be integrated in the master. Having a local repository
to work on and share with
others is also a plus.
But starting with svn should not be a problem either, just wanted to
point out that git or mercurial
would be preferred from the majority of existing OOo contributers.
Regards,
Christian
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
RE: OpenOffice - Wiki - Required Resources - Subversion vs. Mercurial vs. Git
Posted by "Noel J. Bergman" <no...@devtech.com>.
> We already had subversion for some time as the repository for the main
> code and it didn't work well for a project this size.
Tangential to the responses you've already received, I'm curious as to the
problems you experienced with Subversion. Our infrastructure team, working
closely over the years with the Subversion team, has done wonders to get
Subversion working for the ASF. We've often been their canary in the coal
mine. :-)
--- Noel
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org