Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-infrastructure-dev-archive@minotaur.apache.org Received: (qmail 27160 invoked from network); 3 Apr 2011 08:02:03 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.3) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 3 Apr 2011 08:02:03 -0000 Received: (qmail 65751 invoked by uid 500); 3 Apr 2011 08:02:02 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-infrastructure-dev-archive@apache.org Received: (qmail 65588 invoked by uid 500); 3 Apr 2011 08:02:02 -0000 Mailing-List: contact infrastructure-dev-help@apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: infrastructure-dev@apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list infrastructure-dev@apache.org Received: (qmail 65579 invoked by uid 99); 3 Apr 2011 08:02:01 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sun, 03 Apr 2011 08:02:01 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2000.0 required=10 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received: from [140.211.11.9] (HELO minotaur.apache.org) (140.211.11.9) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with SMTP; Sun, 03 Apr 2011 08:01:58 +0000 Received: (qmail 23101 invoked by uid 99); 3 Apr 2011 08:01:37 -0000 Received: from localhost.apache.org (HELO mail-vw0-f50.google.com) (127.0.0.1) (smtp-auth username dlyubimov, mechanism plain) by minotaur.apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sun, 03 Apr 2011 08:01:37 +0000 Received: by vws14 with SMTP id 14so4654759vws.23 for ; Sun, 03 Apr 2011 01:01:36 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.52.68.65 with SMTP id u1mr2461202vdt.310.1301817696162; Sun, 03 Apr 2011 01:01:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.52.169.167 with HTTP; Sun, 3 Apr 2011 01:01:36 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <02f801cbf1ca$ad4b9290$07e2b7b0$@16degrees.com.au> Date: Sun, 3 Apr 2011 01:01:36 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Current use of GitHub From: Dmitriy Lyubimov To: infrastructure-dev@apache.org Cc: "Gav..." Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org ps -- so obviously it would help if ASF git mirrors had the same history trees as git-svn trees. Then anything derived from ASF git would be directly mergeable for commit. I am not sure why current ASF git commit hashes do not match what i get in git-svn but it would have been great if they did (or perhaps i have a wrong version of git-svn?) On Sun, Apr 3, 2011 at 12:51 AM, Dmitriy Lyubimov wrote: > I am using github. > > But there are different scenarious here. > > Scenario #1: you fork ASF git (or github mirror) and create private > branches to work. Then you create a patch and apply as usuall (using > patch -p1) to your git-svn branch. from there you could then use > git-svn dcommit. > > The problem with that approach is that you can't merge into git-svn > branch as it happens that git-svn actually creates different hashes in > commit tree than apache's git mirror. So those histories cannot be > 3-way merged and commits can't be squashed as it would naturally occur > . In addition, since there's a delay between git mirror and actual > snapshot, there's always a danger that somebody commits and git > doesn't see it and your patch would go stale until you can merge it > properly when new commit finally goes thru git replica. > > So it's unnatural. so i switched to > Scenario 2: > instead of forking apache git, i push my git-svn branch directly into > github and then follow everything i said in scenario #2 except i can > now merge-squash directly into git-svn branch after work is done and i > can rebase my git-svn snapshot at any moment. I still have to publish > git diff to jira so others can review it though. > > If several people need to work on the same issue then they can do pull > requests to my issues and then i would be able to incorporate their > work into final squash-merge and git-svn dcommit. Although to tell you > the truth I never collaborated on the same patch with anyone yet. Our > project is fairly too sparsely populated for that so far. > > -dmitriy > > On Sat, Apr 2, 2011 at 11:45 PM, Gav... wrote: >> I'm trying to understand the _current_ workflows of those ASF committers >> using Git and how the ASF GitHub mirrors tie into that - if at all. >> >> A fair few projects requested ASF git mirrors and also requested mirrors of >> that on GitHub (that 2nd request is now standard with the 1st) >> >> So far , from projects I've browsed on GitHub, I see a few forks here and >> there and a few Pull requests here and there. >> That is where it gets fuzzy for me. Obviously, no-one can actually pull in >> those pull requests into the Apache/$project repo mirror, so >> how are committers applying those pull requests? Are they pulling them into >> their own copies of the mirror, converting them into a patch >> that svn understands and then applying, if so, how? If not, how else? >> >> Also, apart from Github, how else are Git only users providing patches to >> projects, which patch programs are in use, and of those which >> are most used by those projects/committers that need to apply them. >> >> For those of you that are committers and have direct access to svn, but are >> preferring to use Git before then committing your work to svn, >> what is your workflow and tools used (whether or not it involves GitHub) >> >> No deviating into what could happen or what would be a good idea please yet, >> this is just a survey on what people are currently actually >> doing to incorporate Git into their workflows and how we then get those >> applied. >> >> Thanks >> >> Gav... >> >> >> >