On Sun, Oct 13, 2013 at 5:06 PM, Phil Steitz <phil.ste...@gmail.com> wrote: > > As I said, I am fine with experimenting and based on that experience > seeing if we can actually get consensus. I stand by my statement > above that the VOTE was premature and while "legal" from ASF > perspective it is not a good practice to try to force consensus by > VOTE-ing and conclude based on a mixed vote that consensus exists. >
I will concede that the VOTE may have been a bit premature, judging by the type of resistance we have to this move. Although, in my defense, there are other projects already successfully using Git and they are alive-and-well, so I didn't think in a million years that the opposition would be based on feasibility of git. SVN may be the most widely used, but my understanding is Git is definitely the most popular (meaning a lot of people on SVN wish they could switch to Git). My intent was not to splinter or fracture the community. On the contrary, I brought this up hoping to *grow* the community. Also, most of the dissenting opinions were expressed after the VOTE was started. The original discussion thread was open for three days before the VOTE was started. > Another healthy discussion that we need to have is how much > standardization are we going to force on components. My view is > less == better, which means the move to git does not have to be all > at once or even ever done uniformly. > Yeah, I don't know how I feel about this one, especially when it comes to SCM. I agree that we may need to be a little more loosey-goosey with our "rules" that are project-wide (I consider myself a closest to a libertarian :). There have to be some things we stay consistent, on, though. Otherwise, why are we all grouped together, then? If we get too loose, then it makes it difficult for folks to jump in on another component and help out if they get an urge (if one of my math books falls of the shelf and hits me in the head and I get some inspiration). > Somewhat ironically, I am +1 for experimenting with git in [math] if > Luc is willing to take the lead in setting it up and we can come to > consensus among the active [math] committers that we think it is a > good thing to spend time on. I just don't think its fair to those > who happen to have missed the last couple of days or chose not to > VOTE, or those who voted -1 to assume that we have "consensus" to > move everything. > It would be great if you want to lend us a hand with the test component we're creating in git, to help us iron out the workflow. It might be a bit cheaper than moving [math] and trying to figure out how to do releases. Might be more fun, too, since we're starting "green field" :) --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
