Re: [DRE-maint] Experiments with git
Antono Vasiljev dijo [Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 01:53:55PM +0200]: Hello, All. I cloned svn repo with git-svn and experimented a little bit. (...) Almost every big ruby project use git today. Why should we use SVN? So. I would like to know your cons/pros about switching to git. Its my '+1' for git for pkg-ruby-extras. Hi, This discussion has been had before. The main reason we have stuck with SVN -besides having everything done and documented this way- is that SVN (and svn-buildpackage) allows us to have -and track- one single repository for our whole flow. Yes, there is a git-buildpackage (and I use it on other packages), but its logic is quite different. git-buildpackage Is not well suited for multi-package repositories. Not only because it likes working at the root of the Git tree (which would of course be fixable), but because of the branches/tags it generates would clash. This is, as SVN tracks a repository from the current directory downwards, it is easy to come up with simple schemes for setting (copying) the branches/tags to ../../tags/$version; were we using Git, the tag would just be a label ($version). Of course, we could come up with a naming logic here, even if it led to very long identifiers. But there is another argument: Our SVN tree is mainly used to track common advance of the history of each of the projects - Not to do development on it. Storing what amounts to only the diffs to the orig.tar.gz means our repository is quite light to work with, but useless without the real thing. This means - We are not using SVN for tracking development, but for sharing state, for a very simple level of collaboration. ___ Pkg-ruby-extras-maintainers mailing list Pkg-ruby-extras-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-ruby-extras-maintainers
Re: [DRE-maint] Experiments with git
Excerpts from Lucas Nussbaum's message of Mon Jan 17 21:41:15 +0200 2011: I think so, yes. All the docs refer to it, the new processes need to be defined, etc, etc. For what benefit? OK, git is faster, and I prefer git for new projects too. It's easier to contribute and live in modern ruby world with git. Almost all big ruby project use git. Why should we use svn? :) ... except the ruby interpreter. ;) http://github.com/ruby/ruby :) I think its easier to track svn repos via git than pull git repos to svn. Don't get me wrong. I like git a lot, and use it preferably to SVN. However, I don't think that SVN has any real problem *for our use*. It slow. Takes a lot of time to update. No local branches, no local history. Its bad :) I can make work on this. I need some mentoring from more experienced debian developer. What parts of workflow are broken without svn-buildpackage? What should be implemented? I saw some checks made by svn-inject when I imported my packages. I suppose this checks are first point in TODO. So, one of the first TODO is probably to see how one could use git + gem2deb to maintain Debian packages, and document the process. For example, how would one handle new upstream releases? Then, another question is how we would be able to maintain 100s of packages with git. Should we do one-repo-per-package? I think yes. Its easier for developer to track changes and track upstream if he have full sources. How could we make that easier? I think that git has sub-modules. Could we leverage that? Sure. Finally, it would be great to have more participation in the -ruby@ thread. When everybody is quiet, it's always a bit uncomfortable because we can't know if it's because everybody agrees, or nobody cares. I made small braindump. Consider it as initial point for discussion :) http://wiki.debian.org/Teams/Ruby/RubyExtras/UsingGit -- xmpp:s...@antono.info http://antono.info/ gopher://antono.info/ signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ Pkg-ruby-extras-maintainers mailing list Pkg-ruby-extras-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-ruby-extras-maintainers
[DRE-maint] Experiments with git
Hello, All. I cloned svn repo with git-svn and experimented a little bit. Local repo size: Git: 34M SVN: 598M WTF? 598MB and there is no local history? Ok. I checked out topmost directory. Lets check trunk/ $ cd trunk $ du -sh 84M Much better, but: - no history - no light branches - no my own repos at gitorious.org or github.com Last time git as our primary VCS was discussed here in 2009: http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-ruby-extras-maintainers/2009-July/003770.html Maybe I do not understand all tricks done after I uploaded my package but I think there is no problems with switching to git (only benefits). I pushed git repo with all svn history to: http://gitorious.org/debian-pkg-ruby-extras/pkg-ruby-extras git clone git://gitorious.org/debian-pkg-ruby-extras/pkg-ruby-extras.git I made simple dbuild.rb script for automating: - download - unpack tar - debuild You can find it in git repo. Almost every big ruby project use git today. Why should we use SVN? So. I would like to know your cons/pros about switching to git. Its my '+1' for git for pkg-ruby-extras. Best wishes. -- xmpp:s...@antono.info http://antono.info/ gopher://antono.info/ ___ Pkg-ruby-extras-maintainers mailing list Pkg-ruby-extras-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-ruby-extras-maintainers
Re: [DRE-maint] Experiments with git
On 17/01/11 at 13:53 +0200, Antono Vasiljev wrote: Hello, All. I cloned svn repo with git-svn and experimented a little bit. Local repo size: Git: 34M SVN: 598M WTF? 598MB and there is no local history? Ok. I checked out topmost directory. Lets check trunk/ $ cd trunk $ du -sh 84M Much better, but: - no history - no light branches - no my own repos at gitorious.org or github.com Last time git as our primary VCS was discussed here in 2009: http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-ruby-extras-maintainers/2009-July/003770.html Maybe I do not understand all tricks done after I uploaded my package but I think there is no problems with switching to git (only benefits). I pushed git repo with all svn history to: http://gitorious.org/debian-pkg-ruby-extras/pkg-ruby-extras git clone git://gitorious.org/debian-pkg-ruby-extras/pkg-ruby-extras.git I made simple dbuild.rb script for automating: - download - unpack tar - debuild You can find it in git repo. Almost every big ruby project use git today. Why should we use SVN? So. I would like to know your cons/pros about switching to git. Its my '+1' for git for pkg-ruby-extras. svn-buildpackage wouldn't work with git. That's a -1000 considering that our current workflow deeply relies on svn-bp. - Lucas ___ Pkg-ruby-extras-maintainers mailing list Pkg-ruby-extras-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-ruby-extras-maintainers
Re: [DRE-maint] Experiments with git
On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 4:53 AM, Antono Vasiljev antono.vasil...@gmail.com wrote: Almost every big ruby project use git today. Why should we use SVN? So. I would like to know your cons/pros about switching to git. Its my '+1' for git for pkg-ruby-extras. I'm +1 for Git. We use it at Opscode for all our software, including our packaging metadata repository. -- Opscode, Inc Joshua Timberman, Technical Evangelist IRC, Skype, Twitter, Github: jtimberman ___ Pkg-ruby-extras-maintainers mailing list Pkg-ruby-extras-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-ruby-extras-maintainers
Re: [DRE-maint] Experiments with git
On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 5:12 AM, Lucas Nussbaum lu...@lucas-nussbaum.net wrote: svn-buildpackage wouldn't work with git. That's a -1000 considering that our current workflow deeply relies on svn-bp. Would it really be a big deal to change the workflow to use git-buildpackage? I don't even use git-buildpackage for the packages I build for apt.opscode.com. I have an sbuild server that builds everything mimicking the buildd workflow. -- Opscode, Inc Joshua Timberman, Technical Evangelist IRC, Skype, Twitter, Github: jtimberman ___ Pkg-ruby-extras-maintainers mailing list Pkg-ruby-extras-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-ruby-extras-maintainers
Re: [DRE-maint] Experiments with git
On 17/01/11 at 10:09 -0700, Joshua Timberman wrote: On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 5:12 AM, Lucas Nussbaum lu...@lucas-nussbaum.net wrote: svn-buildpackage wouldn't work with git. That's a -1000 considering that our current workflow deeply relies on svn-bp. Would it really be a big deal to change the workflow to use git-buildpackage? On 17/01/11 at 19:41 +0200, Antono Vasiljev wrote: Ok. Let's think positive. What required in order to replace svn-buildpackage with $OUR_SCRIPT_NAME. Maybe git-buildpackage may be used? I think so, yes. All the docs refer to it, the new processes need to be defined, etc, etc. For what benefit? OK, git is faster, and I prefer git for new projects too. But I'm not willing to spend a few days working on that transition if there are no clear benefits. However, it is something that can be done at the same time as switching to gem2deb. So help make this happen, and we can do the switch to git at the same time, since gem2deb will force us to redefine all our processes anyway (with clear benefits). - Lucas ___ Pkg-ruby-extras-maintainers mailing list Pkg-ruby-extras-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-ruby-extras-maintainers
Re: [DRE-maint] Experiments with git
Excerpts from Lucas Nussbaum's message of Mon Jan 17 20:30:56 +0200 2011: svn-buildpackage wouldn't work with git. That's a -1000 considering that our current workflow deeply relies on svn-bp. Ok. Let's think positive. What required in order to replace svn-buildpackage with $OUR_SCRIPT_NAME. Maybe git-buildpackage may be used? I think so, yes. All the docs refer to it, the new processes need to be defined, etc, etc. For what benefit? OK, git is faster, and I prefer git for new projects too. It's easier to contribute and live in modern ruby world with git. Almost all big ruby project use git. Why should we use svn? :) Almost every ruby developer (potential package maintainer) is already git user. If we decide some day to keep upstream sources in tree it will be much more easy with git. As for me svn is pain in the ass. However, it is something that can be done at the same time as switching to gem2deb. So help make this happen, and we can do the switch to git at the same time, since gem2deb will force us to redefine all our processes anyway (with clear benefits). I can make work on this. I need some mentoring from more experienced debian developer. What parts of workflow are broken without svn-buildpackage? What should be implemented? I saw some checks made by svn-inject when I imported my packages. I suppose this checks are first point in TODO. Best wishes. -- xmpp:s...@antono.info http://antono.info/ gopher://antono.info/ signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ Pkg-ruby-extras-maintainers mailing list Pkg-ruby-extras-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-ruby-extras-maintainers
Re: [DRE-maint] Experiments with git
On 17/01/11 at 20:55 +0200, Antono Vasiljev wrote: Excerpts from Lucas Nussbaum's message of Mon Jan 17 20:30:56 +0200 2011: svn-buildpackage wouldn't work with git. That's a -1000 considering that our current workflow deeply relies on svn-bp. Ok. Let's think positive. What required in order to replace svn-buildpackage with $OUR_SCRIPT_NAME. Maybe git-buildpackage may be used? I think so, yes. All the docs refer to it, the new processes need to be defined, etc, etc. For what benefit? OK, git is faster, and I prefer git for new projects too. It's easier to contribute and live in modern ruby world with git. Almost all big ruby project use git. Why should we use svn? :) ... except the ruby interpreter. ;) Almost every ruby developer (potential package maintainer) is already git user. If we decide some day to keep upstream sources in tree it will be much more easy with git. As for me svn is pain in the ass. Don't get me wrong. I like git a lot, and use it preferably to SVN. However, I don't think that SVN has any real problem *for our use*. However, it is something that can be done at the same time as switching to gem2deb. So help make this happen, and we can do the switch to git at the same time, since gem2deb will force us to redefine all our processes anyway (with clear benefits). I can make work on this. I need some mentoring from more experienced debian developer. What parts of workflow are broken without svn-buildpackage? What should be implemented? I saw some checks made by svn-inject when I imported my packages. I suppose this checks are first point in TODO. So, one of the first TODO is probably to see how one could use git + gem2deb to maintain Debian packages, and document the process. For example, how would one handle new upstream releases? Then, another question is how we would be able to maintain 100s of packages with git. Should we do one-repo-per-package? How could we make that easier? I think that git has sub-modules. Could we leverage that? Finally, it would be great to have more participation in the -ruby@ thread. When everybody is quiet, it's always a bit uncomfortable because we can't know if it's because everybody agrees, or nobody cares. - Lucas ___ Pkg-ruby-extras-maintainers mailing list Pkg-ruby-extras-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-ruby-extras-maintainers
