I didn't mean to criticize github -- I use it myself for a number of projects and I've been extremely happy with their service. I merely suggested that in terms of the learning curve one may wish to start with local branches and then slowly progress to adding more remote sources. I think throwing multiple remotes at somebody not familiar with git may be, ehm, discouraging ;)
Oh, I am not affiliated with github, but I wholeheartedly recommend it ;) Dawid On Sun, Sep 18, 2011 at 10:36 PM, Dmitriy Lyubimov <dlie...@gmail.com> wrote: > Yes, one doesn't have to use github of course. I do it just to share, > collaborate and let people try and preview what I do with a more timely > detailed history and in more convenient way than an issue patch allows. > > Besides, it allows me to have a backup in case my desktop disk goes cuckoo, > and work from multiple locations. > > But if there's no need to collaborate and backing up the work is not an > issue, sure, one could work just with one local copy. Github just makes life > easier, and it does it for free (it's more than i can say about the site I > use to host my photography ). > > They also have wiki that supports maxjax (I.e. latex for the web) out of > the door (with some minor bugs though) as well as ability to host custom > web pages and even maven repo (which I maintain for some of my projects > instead of leaving the build for another guy who wants to try it). > > What else one might wish for from his source control tool, right?.. > > I am not affiliated with github in any way:-) > On Sep 18, 2011 12:13 PM, "Dawid Weiss" <dawid.we...@cs.put.poznan.pl> > wrote: >> I looked at it -- yes, this is the way to follow. You can save some >> complexity by not keeping a github remote (if you work from one place, >> a local feature branch is enough, no need to push/pull to github). >> >> In case of Lucene you can also work on multiple svn branches and do >> the switching using git... needless to say this is way faster than >> using svn. >> >> Dawid >> >> On Sun, Sep 18, 2011 at 9:03 PM, Ted Dunning <ted.dunn...@gmail.com> > wrote: >>> Dmitriy documented his work-flow which is very similar to this: >>> >>> > http://weatheringthrutechdays.blogspot.com/2011/04/git-github-and-committing-to-asf-svn.html >>> >>> I use his process almost exactly. >>> >>> On Sun, Sep 18, 2011 at 5:58 AM, Dawid Weiss >>> <dawid.we...@cs.put.poznan.pl>wrote: >>> >>>> Yes, these instructions worked for me: >>>> go to http://wiki.apache.org/general/GitAtApache, then: "Git for >>>> Apache committers". The URL for git svn init needs to be: >>>> >>>> git svn init --prefix=origin/ --tags=tags --trunk=trunk >>>> --branches=branches https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/lucene/dev >>>> >>>> Should work out of the box. >>>> >>>> Dawid >>>> >>>> >>>> On Sun, Sep 18, 2011 at 1:42 PM, Grant Ingersoll <gsing...@apache.org> >>>> wrote: >>>> > Resurrecting old thread... >>>> > >>>> > I originally just cloned from the ASF Git mirrors. Is there a way to >>>> then associate it with an SVN repos so that I can then push a branch to > SVN? >>>> I've got a rather large set of changes across several commits (and > don't >>>> remember when I started). My thinking was I would push them as a branch > to >>>> SVN and then do a merge in SVN. I believe I am current w/ trunk. >>>> > >>>> > Any ideas on workflow for this stuff? >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > On Mar 7, 2011, at 4:07 AM, Dawid Weiss wrote: >>>> > >>>> >> I'm the same as Ted -- I have a local repo only and maintain my > branches >>>> in >>>> >> there. Don't know about interoperability with other existing git-svn >>>> mirrors >>>> >> like the ones you mentioned, sorry. >>>> >> >>>> >> Dawid >>>> >> >>>> >> On Mon, Mar 7, 2011 at 9:01 AM, Ted Dunning <ted.dunn...@gmail.com> >>>> wrote: >>>> >> >>>> >>> I use git svn exclusively any more. >>>> >>> >>>> >>> But all of my git mirrors come from the base that I synchronize > using >>>> svn. >>>> >>> I haven't try squishing. >>>> >>> >>>> >>> I have been maintaining 4-7 local branches this way for some time. >>>> Works >>>> >>> like a champ. >>>> >>> >>>> >>> On Sun, Mar 6, 2011 at 11:07 PM, Dmitriy Lyubimov < >>>> dlyubi...@apache.org >>>> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>> >>>> >>>> in case of ASF though i found that git svn for some reason checks > out >>>> >>>> commit history with commit md5 which are different than those >>>> >>>> propagated to github (and i guess git.apache.org). So commit from >>>> >>>> other branches (merged to git-mirrored trunks) cannot be >>>> >>>> merge-squashed to git-svn branch because they fail to establish > base >>>> >>>> version correctly and try to reply a lot more history they actually >>>> >>>> should. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> i guess i have to revert to just doing dirrect patch application. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> git diff -R MAHOUT-??? | patch -p1 >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> it's a bit of a shame. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 12:14 PM, Dawid Weiss >>>> >>>> <dawid.we...@cs.put.poznan.pl> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Works like a charm in my experience, although you should be > careful >>>> >>>> about: >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>>> a) merging; best merge local branches with squashing, so that they >>>> >>>>> appear as a single patch rather than a commit sequence. >>>> >>>>> b) empty folders (remember about setting --rmdir if you're > removing >>>> >>>>> something that should remove folders as well). >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>>> Dawid >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>>> On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 8:39 PM, Dmitriy Lyubimov < > dlie...@gmail.com >>>> > >>>> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>>> Any concerns about git-svn as a commit tool? >>>> >>>>>> >>>> >>>>>> Thanks >>>> >>>>>> -Dima >>>> >>>>>> >>>> >>>>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>>> > >>>> > -------------------------------------------- >>>> > Grant Ingersoll >>>> > http://www.lucidimagination.com >>>> > Lucene Eurocon 2011: http://www.lucene-eurocon.com >>>> > >>>> > >>>> >>> >
