On 4/26/19 11:02 AM, Don Cross wrote:
On Fri, Apr 26, 2019 at 9:52 AM Pierre Labastie <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Le 26 avr. 2019 14:09, William Harrington <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> a écrit :
On 2019-04-23 04:59, Pierre Labastie wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> There is a private repository on github, created by Bryan
Gonzalez
> (thanks to him), containing jhalfs. It has the whole history
of jhalfs
> (not ALFS), up to svn rev 4100. Bryan has given me (not sure
he has
> given others) write privileges to this repository. I've
already added
> a .gitignore file.
Greetings,
Was this an issue when moving from CVS to SVN?
If you want to host via GIT, then add GIT to your hosts.
If you abrasive to learn GIT then do it now. no more excuses.
Time to move along. It like the the move from Linux 2.2 to 2.4 or
2.4 to 2.6.
https://git.wiki.kernel.org/images-git/7/78/Git-svn-cheatsheet.pdf
Ya all use the same kernel which is GIT maintained yet ya don't
want
to use GIT. Still no reason to use SVN.
Bruce isn't the authority on this. This isn't the first time it
has been
brought up. Clearly there is a concern to use GIT for LFS projects.
Sincerely,
William Harrington
I have mixed feelings about this move. On one hand, I do not like
"putting all the eggs in the same basket", as we say in French. In
this case, all open source software in the hands of one company. On
the other hand, github offers many services that are hard to offer
on a server administrated by only one person. I could set up hosting
a git repo on higgs, provided Bruce give me enough privs, but what
about PR, reviews, and the like ? Also, people proposing their help
on the project are enthusiastic about this move. So let's go github...
As of making the other linuxfromscratch repos git, whether on higgs
or github, this is another story. I'd vote for, but I can live with
svn...
Pierre
Hi Pierre,
I understand your concerns about GitHub. For what it's worth, Git itself
makes this much less of a risk because of how it works. When you use Git
to clone a repository, you actually have the *entire* history with a
fully functional copy of it locally. If GitHub becomes unpleasant or
abusive some time in the future, it is very easy for anyone who has an
up-to-date clone to simply move the entire repo to another Git host. All
the revision history will be present just as in the original. I don't
think SVN is like that; my understanding is SVN is very centralized. Git
is the complete opposite, by design. It's actually very difficult to
try to "put a fence around" a Git repo because of this.
My concern is maintaining the current integration between svn and trac.
If the move of jhalfs works well, then we can consider moving LFS and
BLFS (patches/hints also) to git.
The other issue is the work required. Personally I do not see the
advantages in git for LFS. The move appears to be more work for little
or no benefit. There are only a few svn command to know:
svn checkout (once)
svn update
svn status
svn commit
svn diff
and very occasionally
svn info
svn blame
svn cp
svn delete
svn add
svn mv
Changing to git will also require rewriting or at least a major update
of the editor's guide and to several web pages.
http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/edguide/
Also note that the proposed change affects me more than anyone else.
Currently I make about 90% of the changes to LFS and a little over 60%
of the changes to BLFS. It's difficult for me to see those numbers
changing much in a change to git.
-- Bruce
--
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/alfs-discuss
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
