I use git-svn and get the benefit of both. > On Sep 19, 2017, at 1:51 PM, Phillip Rhodes <motley.crue....@gmail.com> wrote: > > Unless there's some compelling technical reason for keep SVN, of which > I am unaware, I am +1 on switching to Git. If nothing else, from an > "optics" perspective it keeps potential new contributors from looking > at the project and thinking "SVN? WTF? Why is this project using > obsolete tech like that???" > > NOTE: I am not saying SVN is obsolete... but I expect a lot of devs do > think it is, given how faddish the tech world is. And I wouldn't > advocate switching for the sake of switching if Git weren't genuinely > a good, probably better, option in it's own right. > > All of that said, this definitely shouldn't hold up an imminent release. > > > Phil > > This message optimized for indexing by NSA PRISM > > > On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 1:42 PM, Herbert Duerr <h...@apache.org> wrote: >> On 09/18/2017 06:30 PM, Damjan Jovanovic wrote: >>> On Mon, Sep 18, 2017 at 7:44 PM, Herbert Duerr <h...@apache.org> wrote: >>>> On 09/17/2017 04:04 PM, Andrea Pescetti wrote: >>>>> On 14/09/2017 Dave Fisher wrote: >>>>>> does SVN vs. GIT prevent new developers from volunteering? >>>>> >>>>> I think this is the key question, even though there are many good points >>>>> also in what others replied. >>>>> >>>>> We currently have a couple semi-official GIT mirrors: one on Github in >>>>> the ASF organization page and the internal one Herbert pointed out. I >>>>> also remember that Herbert once presented a big GIT repository he had >>>>> built with all the available history of the OpenOffice code, but I don't >>>>> know if it is available somewhere. >>>> >>>> I had that 2GB blob on my Apache homepage for a couple of years. When >>>> that home was migrated to the newer locations it was apparently dropped. >>>> Unless someone mirrored the blob it is currently not available anymore. >>>> If anyone is really interested in that ancient history I can probably >>>> resurrect it unless 2+GB blobs are no longer allowed in committer's home >>>> directories. >>>> >>>> >>> That would be great. I need the old repository to regression test an old >>> bug in Base. However, is it legal to have commits from the pre-ASLv2 era? >> >> The related presentation is still available at [1], and I found my blob >> of the historic repos in [2]. Enjoy! >> >> [1] http://home.apache.org/~hdu/HistOOory_Presentation.pdf >> [2] https://dev-www.libreoffice.org/extern/HistOOory_v0.9.zip >> >>>>> I believe that the interested developers (including me, at times) use >>>>> the git-svn tool when convenient. I think that this is enough to allow >>>>> the local workflow improvements Damjan was requesting. Or do you see >>>>> reasons not to use it? >>>> >>>> OpenOffice is only a small part of the Apache subversion repository that >>>> contains many more projects. Most revisions in that repo are not for OOo >>>> and git-svn apparently has a hard time with this. It is possible but not >>>> much fun. >>>> >>>> >>> Excellent insight. Never thought of that. git-svn is almost unusable then. >> >> I think that it could be possible to improve git-svn in cases such as >> the multi-project Apache svn-repository, but that scenario + devs in an >> svn-project using git as their main repo tool is unusual enough that it >> is not worth too much optimization effort. >> >> Herbert >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org >> > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org >
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
