While I like Git and I am therefore not against such a move I think it only makes sense if there're clear listed reasons for it, backporting things from trunk to branch_x is not so hard even with SVN, Lucene for example does that [1] and it's usually just a matter of running svn merge -c $trunk.commit.revision.no https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/lucene/dev/trunk on the branch_x.
Let's also consider there may be a number of current users that are confident with SVN but never tried Git. Again I'm not against it, I like and use a lot Git, but I'd prefer deciding on clear facts rather than just committers' preferences (mine included). My 2 cents, Tommaso [1] : https://wiki.apache.org/lucene-java/SvnMerge 2014-03-05 7:11 GMT+01:00 Sergio Fernández < sergio.fernan...@salzburgresearch.at>: > Hi Stanbolers, > > this is not the first time I put this on the table of the community, but > the discussion never went further... But now 0.1.20 release is out, I think > is a good time to refresh it. > > I'm not sure what others think, but personally I find so inconvenient that > Stanbol still uses svn as scm (in fact it's the only project where I use it > at the momemnt). Switching to a dvcs would bring many possibilities > currently we do not have, specially now that we have to keep the 0.12.x > long-term maintenance branch. > > Actually the svn is already being mirrored (read-only) to git: > > git://git.apache.org/stanbol.git > http://github.com/apache/stanbol > > But I can check Infra to make a testing migration to a real repository. > The transition should not take so long. > > What do you think? Comments are welcomed. > > Cheers, > > -- > Sergio Fernández > Senior Researcher > Knowledge and Media Technologies > Salzburg Research Forschungsgesellschaft mbH > Jakob-Haringer-Straße 5/3 | 5020 Salzburg, Austria > T: +43 662 2288 318 | M: +43 660 2747 925 > sergio.fernan...@salzburgresearch.at > http://www.salzburgresearch.at >
