www-infrastructure-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Mark Struberg <strub...@yahoo.de>
Subject Re: Current use of GitHub
Date Tue, 05 Apr 2011 10:00:05 GMT
I personally barely use dcommit, but frequently use git locally to create a patch which I attach
to jira later. Git is just soooo much quicker at checkout + blame than svn that it easily
pays off. Especially if you are not so deep into the code and need to grab through historical
versions and commit messages of the code. 

I do not use git for projects I'm committer on though.
But I have seen a few people making use of git-clone for grabbing our projects.

LieGrue,
strub

--- On Tue, 4/5/11, Kristian Rosenvold <kristian.rosenvold@gmail.com> wrote:

> From: Kristian Rosenvold <kristian.rosenvold@gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: Current use of GitHub
> To: infrastructure-dev@apache.org
> Date: Tuesday, April 5, 2011, 9:19 AM
> ti., 05.04.2011 kl. 10.08 +0200,
> skrev Jukka Zitting:
> > Hi,
> > 
> > On Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 8:28 AM, Kristian Rosenvold
> > <kristian.rosenvold@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > > *All* git-svn based workflows involve rebasing
> (rewriting history). By
> > > standard git wisdom that makes your workflow
> single-user unless you have
> > > quite advanced git users.
> > 
> > I any case I would recommend git-svn users to use the
> svn repository
> > for collaboration. If you have a commit that can be
> shared, just do a
> > git svn dcommit and everyone is happy ..
> > 
> 
> As long as we're svn-backed, that should certainly be the
> official
> recommendation. This does not mean that's how things happen
> in real
> life ;)
> 
> I frequently use git/github to collaborate with myself at
> different
> computers, so I push/rebase/reset when I move from my
> laptop to my home
> office to my office. Sometimes code can be in shambles, not
> even
> compiling (I can switch dev computers in 30 seconds in this
> manner). Git
> users simply end up using their servers for far more
> use-cases than svn
> users, and I wouldn't dream of dcommitting anything that
> doesn't even
> compile.
> 
> And we already have several examples where asf committers
> choose to
> collaborate in git/github branches only to dcommit when
> done. I'm not
> sure it matters in this context, it just creates larger svn
> commits;
> there may be other concerns about this.
> 
> I understand the original query as requesting insight into
> the current
> usages of the mirrors, and there may be several reasons for
> that. From a
> technical perspective I think the current integration is
> reasonably
> state-of-the-art when it comes to git<->svn
> integration, which
> unfortunately says a lot about the orthogonality of these
> two SCM's
> (although I sometimes suspect there'd be ways to make
> git-svn better).
> There may be some provenance issues that could be addressed
> wrt the git
> forks; maybe something like crawling github looking for
> git-commits that
> are children of "official" apache sha1's (and persist it
> somewhere)
> could be an idea.
> 
> Even with all their limitations, the forks provide great
> value to git
> users. The biggest shame is that you really need to be a
> *good* git user
> to get a smooth experience, it's not much for git-beginners
> who really
> should start their learning with "proper" git.
> 
> Kristian
> 
> 
> 

Mime
View raw message