So, do we have a consensus then? Should I just open a JIRA on Infra to make the conversion?
On Thu, Feb 16, 2017 at 11:27 AM, Christopher Shannon <christopher.l.shan...@gmail.com> wrote: > +1 to move the repo to Git for the same reasons already listed by others. > > On Thu, Feb 16, 2017 at 10:39 AM, Robbie Gemmell <robbie.gemm...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> On 15 February 2017 at 23:41, Jim Gomes <jgo...@apache.org> wrote: >> > Breaking this out into its own discussion thread... >> > >> > It has been proposed that Apache.NMS Subversion repository be moved to a >> > Git repository. While the dominate reason seems to be "that's what >> > everyone else is doing", I'm sure there are more technical reasons for >> the >> > proposal. I will let others offer up those reasons for the move. >> > >> > As for my position, Subversion has been sufficient, but I'm not entirely >> > opposed to the move as long as certain technical requirements can be met. >> > These technical requirements can be entirely met if the Git repository is >> > automatically mirrored to GitHub, which allows for Subversion clients to >> > access a Git repository. In that case, the port to a Git repository >> > back-end would be completely transparent. >> > >> > So, let's discuss the technical merits on moving the repository to Git. >> >> I'd also agree that whilst moving the NMS bits to Git is not strictly >> necessary to do such work as outlined in the propsal thread, doing so >> would make contributing easier for many folks, especially >> non-committers. It would also make it easier for any committers >> participating in that process. Regardless of that, it would also be >> nice to be consistent with all the other ActiveMQ components. >> >> Yes, it is true that people can use git-svn to interact with svn >> repositories. I used to do so for many years, and still do >> occasionally on one svn holdout (more on it below), which is a little >> annoying. Using git-svn is definitely nicer than using svn directly, >> but still not as nice as using Git directly. It is also something new >> for many folks to learn when there is a high probability they are >> using pure Git these days, and an increasing chance over time that its >> actually all some people are familiar with. >> >> As Tim mentioned, it is possible to have Git and GitHub mirrors even >> for Subversion based repositories here at Apache. There are downsides >> to this, e.g. I've seen 15-40mins syncs to GitHub recently on the last >> example of it over at Qpid currently (thankfully it is already slated >> to move to Git, as everything else at Qpid has already, once some >> in-progress tree surgery on the components is complete), however it is >> substantially better than not having the mirrors at all. For me, its >> less work (for us, and for infra, who would have to rework any >> git+github mirrors again later if the source repo later moves to Git) >> and gives a better result for most people to move it to Git at this >> point. As you noted, GitHub allows svn clients to interact with the >> repos which would allow a path for anyone needing svn to continue >> using it. >> >> Robbie >> -- Clebert Suconic
