river-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Patricia Shanahan <p...@acm.org>
Subject Re: State of the project
Date Thu, 05 May 2016 21:32:50 GMT
In the longer term, my understanding is that the Infrastructure team is 
working on ways of using Git that are compatible with ASF's IP history 
requirements. They are running a small experiment with a couple of projects.

I will continue to monitor board@ in the hope of adding Git read/write 
access to the River source code when feasible.

On 5/5/2016 5:15 AM, Bryan Thompson wrote:
> There are several key reasons for moving to git, and a read-only repository
> would not support most of them:
>
> * Git makes it significantly easier to branch and merge when compared to
> SVN, CVS, etc.
> * Git pull requests encapsulate an opportunity for feedback on branches and
> easy diffs between branches that is unparalleled by SVN, etc.
> * PRs can be contributed more easily from the broader community (but such
> PRs would require Apache CLAs, etc. before they could be incorporated into
> an Apache project so we might not get much utility from this).
> * Git repositories can be easily forked (a read-only view would support
> this), and these forks can flow updates back to the original project (this
> would again run into trouble with the Apache CLA process).
>
> Thanks,
> Bryan
>
> On Tue, May 3, 2016 at 7:48 AM, Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> wrote:
>
>> Currently, I believe only read-only Git mirrors are supported for most
>> projects. See http://www.apache.org/dev/git.html. It looks as though the
>> process for adding a mirror is fairly simple. Would that level of support
>> be useful?
>>
>> There is an experiment going on to extend Git use. I suggest at least one
>> of you should subscribe to the infrastructure-dev@ list to follow what is
>> happening.
>>
>> On 5/3/2016 4:22 AM, Tom Hobbs wrote:
>>
>>> Could we consider a service registrar that doesn't require code
>>>> downloads? Other language support?  What might it look like?
>>>>
>>>
>>> This is my particular itch right now.  I’m happy to work on pulling
>>> reggie out as one of the first modules.
>>>
>>> And +1 for git.
>>>
>>>
>>> On 3 May 2016, at 11:29, Peter <jini@zeus.net.au> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Could we consider a service registrar that doesn't require code
>>>> downloads? Other language support?  What might it look like?
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>

Mime
View raw message