community-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Benson Margulies <>
Subject Re: Feedback on Flex board report
Date Sat, 27 Apr 2013 17:12:48 GMT
Lewis, did you or anyone else feel that you were pushed to git?

While your story has a bit of @infra-specific business to it, the majority
of it and flex's seem to be composed of 'we heard that git was cool, so we
moved to it, and we stepped on a rake.'

Personally, I wouldn't recommend that any community, Apache or otherwise,
move to git unless it contained several people who were already experienced
in managing a project of similar complexity in git. I'd say the same thing
about Maven. Or any number of other tools.

I don't see this as having much to do with git in particular. Anything that
is simultaneously so basic to project operations as the SCM, and as complex
as git, or svn, or Maven, or any number of other things, is going to take
significant learning, and the benefits, if any, only come after the

On Sat, Apr 27, 2013 at 1:06 PM, Lewis John Mcgibbney <> wrote:

> Hi,
> (removed board@ and dev@flex from my reply)
> I've watched this thread with a keen sense of interest.
> I would like to point out that we (the Any23 community) have more or less
> experienced the exact same as the flex guys.
> The build was broken as git binaries are not available on solaris slaves
> for nightly builds. There was confusion about what code we move to git. We
> are now in a situation where the Any23 site is writable (the rest read
> only) within SVN and our trunk code, KEYS file etc is writable and lives in
> git.
> The release process stalled until we fixed the maven pom's.
> I feel that it is necessary and therefore justified to let others know
> about what needs to be considered when the migration is taking place.
> In our situation, its really, really stalled our development of the Any23
> library. Ironically, our intent (behind the move to git) was to build the
> community as more people seemed comfortable with git. This so far has
> proved fruitless as its taken us way to long to sort out the above. Which
> is a real shame and pretty frustrating.
> Lewis
> On Saturday, April 27, 2013, Ross Gardler <>
> wrote:
> > Let me repeat again that the value I see in the Flex report is that it
> identifies some issues that projects moving to git should consider and plan
> for. This will make other projects migrations smoother.
> >
> > Sent from a mobile device, please excuse mistakes and brevity
> >
> > On 26 Apr 2013 18:35, "Luciano Resende" <> wrote:
> >>
> >> On Fri, Apr 26, 2013 at 2:17 AM, Ross Gardler <
> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> I just wanted to thank you for the feedback you provided in your last
> >>> board report with respect to your experiences with moving to Git. This
> >>> kind of information is really useful to those in other projects. For
> >>> the benefit of the archives (and ComDev PMC) I've copied the relevant
> >>> section at the end of this mail.
> >>>
> >>> I'd really like to see this documented in the ComDev project. Perhaps
> >>> in the section "For Commtters/PMCs". This could form the start of a
> >>> page on best practices for version control which would link out to
> >>> appropriate documentation on Git and SVN workflows, review processes
> >>> etc.
> >>>
> >>> If anyone in the Flex community can write up your experiences as
> >>> documentation on that site (it is editable by all committers) we'd
> >>> really appreciate it.Note, the ComDev site is intended to "signpost"
> >>> into more detailed documentation. The idea is not to be fully detailed
> >>> but to provide a high level overview linking out to the details. To
> >>> this end the content in the board report is at about the right level
> >>> for the ComDev site, it just needs a little context padding for the
> >>> ComDev site. If you have process documents on your own project pages
> >>> please feel free to link to them as appropriate.
> >>>
> >>> If someone does find the time - thank you in advance. If not, then
> >>> thank you for including it in the board report. Hopefully I or another
> >>> ComDev memver will find the time to move it into the ComDev site.
> >>>
> >>> Ross
> >>>
> >>> Relevant section from board report:
> >>>
> >>> We moved our code base from SVN to Git in mid-March.  It has been a
> much
> >>> more difficult transition than expected.  Three weeks later, folks are
> still
> >>> confused about how to use Git as it has many options for performing
> tasks
> >>> that can have significant implications.  Git's database model is not
> suited
> >>> for partial checkouts like SVN, making the management of our
> "whiteboard" (a
> >>> playground for committers) much more difficult as you have to download
> the
> >>> entire whiteboard (currently 245MB) first.  There is discussion of
> managing
> >>> the whiteboard on GitHub, but others feel that it doesn't conform to
> the
> >>> Apache way.
> >>>
> >>> The move to Git has slowed contributions from some committers as folks
> >>> aren't sure they have the time to learn to use Git and are afraid of
> using
> >>> the wrong options.  Hopefully, the net benefit promised by the Git
> >>> supporters will eventually be realized.
> >>>
> >>> The move to Git has also broken our release and build scripts and we
> are in
> >>> the process of fixing them.  We also need to get the Git mirrors
> working
> >>> again, as well as our CI implementation.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Ross Gardler (@rgardler)
> >>> Programme Leader (Open Development)
> >>> OpenDirective
> >>
> >>
> >> -1 for using Apache Flex's bad experience, as a concrete example, as
> this might give the wrong perception about Git at Apache.
> >> +1 for documenting most used git and svn workflows used in Apache
> Projects, this might avoid similar problems in the future.
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Luciano Resende
> >>
> >>
> >>
> --
> *Lewis*

  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message