I look at git in terms of the ease of use for branch/merge patterns and the support of pull requests for code review and historical change tracking. It is really far superior in its flexibility. Even just the diff facility if a big step forward.
I do agree that projects benefit significantly from governance. If it degenerates to everyone creating their own fork then nothing good would come of that. I am not suggesting git because it makes forking easier. But because it makes team development easier. Bryan On Wednesday, July 6, 2016, Simon IJskes - QCG <si...@qcg.nl> wrote: > On 05-07-16 14:51, Bryan Thompson wrote: > >> GitHub (at least) provides excellent tracking. It is a matter of how you >> define policy for PRs. We do not accept PRs unless the author is a >> contributor with appropriate CLAs for the project. So it works out very >> nicely for us. Every single commit and its authorship remains visible and >> that metadata can be easily accessed. >> > > Is changing the version control system really going to change the problems > we have? > > The same goes for maven or not, gradle or ant, etc. > > One direction wants a stable release with bugfixes, and strict maintaining > of the original api, the other side wants to change things. > > No resolution in sight. I really like the Apache governance, and it gives > everybody the freedom to fork it under its own. Apache is definitly not the > problem here. > > Apache is a tool, a tool that shows us that we need to cooperate in order > to make progress. You can switch to git, and fork all you like, like so > many other projects. But then you have a few forks, sitting stale on > github. With sometimes an individual caring about it, or more times not. > Apache goes beyond individuals, and currently it shows we haven't made that > step. > > G. Simon > > -- > QCG, Software development, 071-5890970, http://www.qcg.nl > Quality Consultancy Group b.v., Leiderdorp, Kvk Den Haag: 28088397 >
