> Am 03.05.2023 um 23:03 schrieb Christophe JAILLET
> <christophe.jail...@wanadoo.fr>:
>
> Le 03/05/2023 à 21:12, Eric Covener a écrit :
>> On Tue, Apr 25, 2023 at 2:45 PM Graham Leggett via dev
>> <dev@httpd.apache.org> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 25 Apr 2023, at 07:45, Ruediger Pluem <rpl...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>
>>> 2. Switching from Subversion to Git is mostly an emotional problem for me.
>>> We have some closer ties to Subversion by some
>>> overlaps in the community and via mod_dav_svn we kind of partially eat
>>> our very own dogfood here by using Subversion.
>>> We wouldn't do that any longer with Git. Plus it would switch another of
>>> our development tools from an Apache license to GPL.
>>> Apart from technical aspects that this change would create we should
>>> check if all of the current active committers are fine
>>> using Github. While people could use Gitbox and thus avoid Github when we
>>> use Git I would like us to leverage the features of
>>> Github when we would do this switch and I think this cannot be done if
>>> active committers would have issues with Github.
>>>
>>>
>>> +1.
>>>
>>> I've always found the fight about “must be git” to be really tedious.
>>> Github supports both git and svn to this day, and people are free to use
>>> what they prefer by using the interface they are most familiar with.
>>>
>>> While Github is popular today, this is only because the goals of the owners
>>> of Github are presently aligned with our goals. As Twitter has taught us,
>>> goals change at any time and without warning.
>> Hi Graham -- it's a little unclear to me where this would put you
>> "vote" wise about moving to read/write Git.
>> Anyone else with a stake have an opinion? It has been since about 2019
>> since we last discussed it here, I am hoping people have warmed up to
>> it.
>
> svn or git both fit my needs.
>
> git would be slightly easier for me because of the feature to easily commit
> only parts of changes of files (I think that some svn clients also support
> it, but not the one I use)
>
> github is great because it can be used for code review without the need to
> commit something. A patch can be discussed, updated, improved, ... cleanly
> before being merged. That's a great feature IMHO.
>
> git/github would also make the project more attractive for others
> contributions I think.
>
> So, even if I personality really don't care for myself, I would +1 the sake
> of the project.
Many +1s
>
> Just my 2c,
>
> CJ
