I believe that everyone in the felix-users confluence group now has access to edit pages in my 'personal space'.
On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 9:49 PM, Benson Margulies <bimargul...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 7:50 PM, David Jencks <david.a.jen...@gmail.com> wrote: >> I also see no way to edit your page, and I have no idea who might be a >> confluence space administrator who could change permissions. >> >> I was going to add to the pro-single-git-repo the point that you can check >> out exactly the parts you want using git sparse-checkout. >> >> I don’t think the decision to move to git can be made independent of choice >> of a git workflow. I’m strongly in favor of triangular workflow. > > Presumably, when it's morning in Europe, someone will turn up who > knows how to admin bimargul...@gmail.com into the Felix space. If not, > I'll open an Infra ticket. > > meanwhile, can't you all at least put things into comments on the bottom? > > (I can't see a way to give other people edit permission to my 'personal > space'). > > > >> >> thanks >> david jencks >> >>> On Dec 1, 2015, at 4:14 PM, Benson Margulies <bimargul...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> On Dec 1, 2015 6:43 PM, "Richard S. Hall" <he...@ungoverned.org> wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>>> On Dec 1, 2015, at 17:50, Benson Margulies <bimargul...@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/~bimargul...@gmail.com/Felix+and+Git >>>>> >>>>> ? >>>> >>>> Seems like a good start, although is that editable by others? >>> >>> I don't know. Try? I don't have perms to make a page on the Felix wiki , if >>> I get some I will move it. >>> >>>> >>>> It seems like other technical issues were raised about the approaches, so >>> it would be nice to see those added in there by people who have experience. >>>> >>>> I admit, for me, SCM is a necessary evil and not something I get too >>> exited about. I haven’t seen anything to prefer git over svn or vice versa. >>> They’re just different hammers for the same nail. >>>> >>>> Still, thinking about the options, it seems like multiple repos creates a >>> maintenance headache to some degree. For example, line-ending handling is >>> fairly difficult to get configured correctly in git. By having multiple >>> repositories, then every repository would have to have this configured >>> individually, since stuff like that is good to have configured uniformly. >>> Any changes to how we want things uniformly handled would require manual >>> propagation of configuration. Of course, this seems like it would be an >>> issue in any proliferation of repositories (svn or git). >>>> >>>> Or perhaps there is a better way to handle such issues? >>>> >>>> -> richard >>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 1:56 PM, Richard S. Hall <he...@ungoverned.org> >>> wrote: >>>>>> On 12/1/15 13:40 , Carsten Ziegeler wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Richard S. Hall wrote >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Well, the argument to the contrary is perhaps that is makes it more >>>>>>>> difficult for us as a community to have oversight into releases. It >>>>>>>> almost assures us that some/many community members will never >>> checkout >>>>>>>> subprojects that aren't in the repository they normally work. >>> Granted, >>>>>>>> there is no guarantee of this now, since I can just check out what I >>>>>>>> want anyway...but at least it is fairly easy for me to do so now and >>> it >>>>>>>> becomes more difficult if everyone spreads to their own repos. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> So, in that regard, I'm more aligned with Marcel...all or nothing >>> makes >>>>>>>> more sense. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Hmm, ok fair point - however, the *all* is the problematic part where >>> we >>>>>>> couldn't agree on last time (one git repo vs many git repos). >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> But isn't it then incumbent on those wanting such changes to convince >>> us one >>>>>> way or the other? >>>>>> >>>>>> Personally, I'd rather just have one big git repo if we are going to >>> switch, >>>>>> if for no other reason than it seems like less overhead. However, I >>> admit to >>>>>> not really knowing the advantages/disadvantages. >>>>>> >>>>>> Regardless, at a minimum, perhaps someone should create a documented >>>>>> pros/cons list for the approaches. This would at least give us a way >>> to call >>>>>> a vote where we can feel somewhat informed about the choices (i.e., >>> stay >>>>>> with svn, move to one git repo, move to many git repos). >>>>>> >>>>>> Better than saying, "there is no consensus, so let's just go our >>> separate >>>>>> ways"... >>>>>> >>>>>> -> richard >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> We could still provide a script in the root of svn which checks out >>> the >>>>>>> moved projects from git and gives the same experience :) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Carsten >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>> >>
